This is not a takeover...

[Okrahomer]

4 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Please ship them to California.

We have one ward with 15 active M Phood holders, 50 total sacrament attendance.  If they dissolved it everyone would have to drive at least 40 minutes to another building except those who take the bus....  and then it could be an hour and a half.   It's in a poor part of town BUT the love they have for everyone is INTENSE.  It would be a shame to break up that group!  It really would be like breaking up a family, they are all so dependent on each other.   Sad decisions. 

Yes we are horrible Latter Day Saints- some actually ride the bus to church!  ON SUNDAY!  Clearly they will burn in hell for that. 

We have actually put senior missionary couples in there just to bolster the ward.

 

This is a “high growth” area of northern Utah County.  We moved here in October.  The Ward was split right as we moved in.  And it looks like it will be split again before the year is out.  My guess is that between 30 - 40% of the in migration here comes from California.  The vast majority are young to middle-aged couples who work in “Silicon Slopes” businesses.

[Regor]

I think I was a little naïve  as a new member of the church at the age of 20. I thought all callings were God inspired, but my testimony of this belief has been shaken over the years.  I have enjoyed and continue to enjoy serving in the church and had  many wonderful experiences. However in  retrospect I feel like a workhorse, receiving callings that  stymied my spiritual leadership growth by their nature.  While others conversely walked the leadership rout by socializing with people who are generally above their priesthood and calling station. I don’t roll like that. When I was in the primary I directed all  effort towards teaching the children, when in the scouts for years I put effort into helping the boys attend as many campouts as possible and learn the program so they would gain leadership, not try to show mine. As a result of my 31 years of continuous activity, serving a mission, supporting my leaders, and being a worth temple holder I’m now a 51 year old Elder. You don’t need to send me the Ensign article “Only an Elder” to make me feel better it only hurts when I think about it. I’m the only member in my family so I don’t have the shame of other siblings,  parents, or other family members but as my sons leave the home I believe they will become High Priest before me. I never  talk to anyone about my age and not being a High Priest, it would be added shame to let anyone I know personally know that it hurts. It drives my wife of 25 years crazy, and she says that the Rodney Dangerfield award she won in  college now goes to me. When the combining of Elders and High Priests quorums change happened she said, well that seals it, you’ll never be a high priest now.

 

My one son saw a members enter the bishopric that had not served a missions and said; ” look at so and so, they didn’t serve a mission and God thinks there a better leader then return missionaries,  I think I will do like them and not go on a mission”. I’m passed over for High Priest leadership while divorced and remarried men enter bishoprics and High council, almost always to join their friends in those positions. Like I said, it doesn’t bother me that much, I enjoy serving and am not a big ego type that seeks after higher profile calling, obviously. However, when you’re the young men’s president at an older age and  still an Elder you tend to get the look of “What is wrong with him?” I have to believe there is a degree of bias in who is chosen to serve in callings.  In the end my thought is that this is my trial in life, to live without ever having the opportunity to serve in High Priest callings. I guess I will not be one of the 144,000 High Priests teaching throughout the decimated world during the millennium. I will have too much family history to continue working on anyway. I think it is therapeutic to express my feelings somewhere rather than just keep them bottled up, good use of this forum. From an overall administrative standpoint I don’t know if the policy change will be that effective. For years my wife and I have discussed the priesthood being held by men and we both believe it’s because men have egos and need to lead. If we didn’t have a men driven leadership then we would be like all the other churches where the women run the church and the men stay home and watch football. So I should be grateful the Melchizedek priesthood under the office of Elder has offered me the opportunity to move away from my worship of football I experienced during the 70’s and part of the 80’s. Seriously, it has been a blessing to bless others including my family.

 

Maybe someday when I work though this it will be beneficial to another. I wasn’t able to help a newly baptized family in my previous ward, they felt the Ward was like a big high school. A popularity contest,  their parting words were; “ we had to deal with a mandatory  4 year popularity contest, why would we voluntarily  continue living the rest of our life like that?”  Their experience best describes the frustration, when maybe the more popular or friend of the leader is chosen instead of the best person. I know it’s not like this everywhere but unfortunately I have been in 4 wards like this.

[Okrahomer]

1 hour ago, Regor said:

I think I was a little naïve  as a new member of the church at the age of 20. I thought all callings were God inspired, but my testimony of this belief has been shaken over the years.  I have enjoyed and continue to enjoy serving in the church and had  many wonderful experiences. However in  retrospect I feel like a workhorse, receiving callings that  stymied my spiritual leadership growth by their nature.  While others conversely walked the leadership rout by socializing with people who are generally above their priesthood and calling station. I don’t roll like that. When I was in the primary I directed all  effort towards teaching the children, when in the scouts for years I put effort into helping the boys attend as many campouts as possible and learn the program so they would gain leadership, not try to show mine. As a result of my 31 years of continuous activity, serving a mission, supporting my leaders, and being a worth temple holder I’m now a 51 year old Elder. You don’t need to send me the Ensign article “Only an Elder” to make me feel better it only hurts when I think about it. I’m the only member in my family so I don’t have the shame of other siblings,  parents, or other family members but as my sons leave the home I believe they will become High Priest before me. I never  talk to anyone about my age and not being a High Priest, it would be added shame to let anyone I know personally know that it hurts. It drives my wife of 25 years crazy, and she says that the Rodney Dangerfield award she won in  college now goes to me. When the combining of Elders and High Priests quorums change happened she said, well that seals it, you’ll never be a high priest now.

 

My one son saw a members enter the bishopric that had not served a missions and said; ” look at so and so, they didn’t serve a mission and God thinks there a better leader then return missionaries,  I think I will do like them and not go on a mission”. I’m passed over for High Priest leadership while divorced and remarried men enter bishoprics and High council, almost always to join their friends in those positions. Like I said, it doesn’t bother me that much, I enjoy serving and am not a big ego type that seeks after higher profile calling, obviously. However, when you’re the young men’s president at an older age and  still an Elder you tend to get the look of “What is wrong with him?” I have to believe there is a degree of bias in who is chosen to serve in callings.  In the end my thought is that this is my trial in life, to live without ever having the opportunity to serve in High Priest callings. I guess I will not be one of the 144,000 High Priests teaching throughout the decimated world during the millennium. I will have too much family history to continue working on anyway. I think it is therapeutic to express my feelings somewhere rather than just keep them bottled up, good use of this forum. From an overall administrative standpoint I don’t know if the policy change will be that effective. For years my wife and I have discussed the priesthood being held by men and we both believe it’s because men have egos and need to lead. If we didn’t have a men driven leadership then we would be like all the other churches where the women run the church and the men stay home and watch football. So I should be grateful the Melchizedek priesthood under the office of Elder has offered me the opportunity to move away from my worship of football I experienced during the 70’s and part of the 80’s. Seriously, it has been a blessing to bless others including my family.

 

Maybe someday when I work though this it will be beneficial to another. I wasn’t able to help a newly baptized family in my previous ward, they felt the Ward was like a big high school. A popularity contest,  their parting words were; “ we had to deal with a mandatory  4 year popularity contest, why would we voluntarily  continue living the rest of our life like that?”  Their experience best describes the frustration, when maybe the more popular or friend of the leader is chosen instead of the best person. I know it’s not like this everywhere but unfortunately I have been in 4 wards like this.

Your post kind of breaks my heart.  I've been in Wards that have seemed much as you describe--i.e., cliquish.  It made Church life much less satisfying.  We live in a ward now, though, where absolutely nobody knows anyone; because we all just moved here from somewhere else.  I'm not sure if one experience is any better than the other.  Like you and your wife; we just keep plugging away.  If we lived in your Ward, I think we'd be friends.

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Regor said:

I think I was a little naïve  as a new member of the church at the age of 20. I thought all callings were God inspired, but my testimony of this belief has been shaken over the years.  I have enjoyed and continue to enjoy serving in the church and had  many wonderful experiences. However in  retrospect I feel like a workhorse, receiving callings that  stymied my spiritual leadership growth by their nature.  While others conversely walked the leadership rout by socializing with people who are generally above their priesthood and calling station. I don’t roll like that. When I was in the primary I directed all  effort towards teaching the children, when in the scouts for years I put effort into helping the boys attend as many campouts as possible and learn the program so they would gain leadership, not try to show mine. As a result of my 31 years of continuous activity, serving a mission, supporting my leaders, and being a worth temple holder I’m now a 51 year old Elder. You don’t need to send me the Ensign article “Only an Elder” to make me feel better it only hurts when I think about it. I’m the only member in my family so I don’t have the shame of other siblings,  parents, or other family members but as my sons leave the home I believe they will become High Priest before me. I never  talk to anyone about my age and not being a High Priest, it would be added shame to let anyone I know personally know that it hurts. It drives my wife of 25 years crazy, and she says that the Rodney Dangerfield award she won in  college now goes to me. When the combining of Elders and High Priests quorums change happened she said, well that seals it, you’ll never be a high priest now.

 

My one son saw a members enter the bishopric that had not served a missions and said; ” look at so and so, they didn’t serve a mission and God thinks there a better leader then return missionaries,  I think I will do like them and not go on a mission”. I’m passed over for High Priest leadership while divorced and remarried men enter bishoprics and High council, almost always to join their friends in those positions. Like I said, it doesn’t bother me that much, I enjoy serving and am not a big ego type that seeks after higher profile calling, obviously. However, when you’re the young men’s president at an older age and  still an Elder you tend to get the look of “What is wrong with him?” I have to believe there is a degree of bias in who is chosen to serve in callings.  In the end my thought is that this is my trial in life, to live without ever having the opportunity to serve in High Priest callings. I guess I will not be one of the 144,000 High Priests teaching throughout the decimated world during the millennium. I will have too much family history to continue working on anyway. I think it is therapeutic to express my feelings somewhere rather than just keep them bottled up, good use of this forum. From an overall administrative standpoint I don’t know if the policy change will be that effective. For years my wife and I have discussed the priesthood being held by men and we both believe it’s because men have egos and need to lead. If we didn’t have a men driven leadership then we would be like all the other churches where the women run the church and the men stay home and watch football. So I should be grateful the Melchizedek priesthood under the office of Elder has offered me the opportunity to move away from my worship of football I experienced during the 70’s and part of the 80’s. Seriously, it has been a blessing to bless others including my family.

 

Maybe someday when I work though this it will be beneficial to another. I wasn’t able to help a newly baptized family in my previous ward, they felt the Ward was like a big high school. A popularity contest,  their parting words were; “ we had to deal with a mandatory  4 year popularity contest, why would we voluntarily  continue living the rest of our life like that?”  Their experience best describes the frustration, when maybe the more popular or friend of the leader is chosen instead of the best person. I know it’s not like this everywhere but unfortunately I have been in 4 wards like this.

I am sorry you feel this way.

In my world, being 51 and being an elder would be routine.

I suppose there is nothing anyone can say to make you feel better, your bitterness seems very deep, and to me, it is groundless.

Sorry, but I felt guided to say that, someone has to. Sympathy won't shake you out of this.

[rongo]

1 hour ago, Regor said:

I think I was a little naïve  as a new member of the church at the age of 20. I thought all callings were God inspired, but my testimony of this belief has been shaken over the years.  I have enjoyed and continue to enjoy serving in the church and had  many wonderful experiences. However in  retrospect I feel like a workhorse, receiving callings that  stymied my spiritual leadership growth by their nature.  While others conversely walked the leadership rout by socializing with people who are generally above their priesthood and calling station. I don’t roll like that. When I was in the primary I directed all  effort towards teaching the children, when in the scouts for years I put effort into helping the boys attend as many campouts as possible and learn the program so they would gain leadership, not try to show mine. As a result of my 31 years of continuous activity, serving a mission, supporting my leaders, and being a worth temple holder I’m now a 51 year old Elder. You don’t need to send me the Ensign article “Only an Elder” to make me feel better it only hurts when I think about it. I’m the only member in my family so I don’t have the shame of other siblings,  parents, or other family members but as my sons leave the home I believe they will become High Priest before me. I never  talk to anyone about my age and not being a High Priest, it would be added shame to let anyone I know personally know that it hurts. It drives my wife of 25 years crazy, and she says that the Rodney Dangerfield award she won in  college now goes to me. When the combining of Elders and High Priests quorums change happened she said, well that seals it, you’ll never be a high priest now.

 

My one son saw a members enter the bishopric that had not served a missions and said; ” look at so and so, they didn’t serve a mission and God thinks there a better leader then return missionaries,  I think I will do like them and not go on a mission”. I’m passed over for High Priest leadership while divorced and remarried men enter bishoprics and High council, almost always to join their friends in those positions. Like I said, it doesn’t bother me that much, I enjoy serving and am not a big ego type that seeks after higher profile calling, obviously. However, when you’re the young men’s president at an older age and  still an Elder you tend to get the look of “What is wrong with him?” I have to believe there is a degree of bias in who is chosen to serve in callings.  In the end my thought is that this is my trial in life, to live without ever having the opportunity to serve in High Priest callings. I guess I will not be one of the 144,000 High Priests teaching throughout the decimated world during the millennium. I will have too much family history to continue working on anyway. I think it is therapeutic to express my feelings somewhere rather than just keep them bottled up, good use of this forum. From an overall administrative standpoint I don’t know if the policy change will be that effective. For years my wife and I have discussed the priesthood being held by men and we both believe it’s because men have egos and need to lead. If we didn’t have a men driven leadership then we would be like all the other churches where the women run the church and the men stay home and watch football. So I should be grateful the Melchizedek priesthood under the office of Elder has offered me the opportunity to move away from my worship of football I experienced during the 70’s and part of the 80’s. Seriously, it has been a blessing to bless others including my family.

 

Maybe someday when I work though this it will be beneficial to another. I wasn’t able to help a newly baptized family in my previous ward, they felt the Ward was like a big high school. A popularity contest,  their parting words were; “ we had to deal with a mandatory  4 year popularity contest, why would we voluntarily  continue living the rest of our life like that?”  Their experience best describes the frustration, when maybe the more popular or friend of the leader is chosen instead of the best person. I know it’s not like this everywhere but unfortunately I have been in 4 wards like this.

You, and many others, are the heart of the Church.

While speaking the other day to the people, I observed that "the race was not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong," neither riches to men of wisdom. I happened to cast my eyes upon Ira Ames, who was sitting in the congregation, I knew he had been in the Church a considerable length of time, I have been personally acquainted with him for twenty years. My eye also caught many more of the first Saints at the same time. These men know that "Mormonism" is true, they have moved steadily forward, and have not sought to become noted characters, as many have; but, unseen as it were, they have maintained their footing steadily in the right path. I could place my hand upon many in this congregation, who will win the race, though they are not very swift, to outward appearance, and they make not great pretensions; they are found continually attending to their own business. They do not appear to be great warriors, or as if they were likely to win the battle. But what is their true character? They have faith today, they are filled with faith, their words are few, but they are full of integrity. You will find them to-morrow as they were yesterday, or are today. Visit them when you will, or under whatever circumstances, and you find them unalterably the same; and finally when you have spent your life with them, you will find that their lives throughout have been well spent, full of faith, hope, charity, and good works, as far as they have had the ability. These are the ones who will win the race, conquer in the battle, and obtain the peace and righteousness of eternity.

(Brigham Young, June 13, 1853. Journal of Discourses 1:89)

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, Regor said:

Like I said, it doesn’t bother me that much, I enjoy serving and am not a big ego type that seeks after higher profile calling, obviously.

But it bothers you enough to write 3 paragraphs about it and post it on the internet.

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, Regor said:

when you’re the young men’s president at an older age and  still an Elder you tend to get the look of “What is wrong with him?”

Having both served in a bishopric and as a young mens president I would argue that a young mens president is more important.  The young mens president has an opportunity to work much closer with those whom he serves and influence them, for good, on a much more personal level.  Last Sunday my main duty seemed to be counting tithing, arranging for the mothers day gifts to be distributed, picking up old sacrament meeting programs off the pews, and opening closets and doors for people who don't bring their keys to church.

[mfbukowski]

45 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Having both served in a bishopric and as a young mens president I would argue that a young mens president is more important.  The young mens president has an opportunity to work much closer with those whom he serves and influence them, for good, on a much more personal level.  Last Sunday my main duty seemed to be counting tithing, arranging for the mothers day gifts to be distributed, picking up old sacrament meeting programs off the pews, and opening closets and doors for people who don't bring their keys to church.

Totally agree. We had a young men's president who was an elder who had to be ordained a high priest before he became Bishop. Youth related callings are the most important in the church.  In many cases it was beneficial to keep youth leaders in the elders Quorum for the fellowship among their priesthood Brethren who will be needed on hikes etc. 

High priests barely even knew the younger Elders who are needed for those kinds of activities. And older guys who had never been in a bishopric felt out of place in the high priest group.

You can't win for losing.

Now that problem has been erased. Good luck in trying to get the old guys to carry a pack, or the young pups to understand the drudgery of "leadership".

Edited May 16, 2018 by mfbukowski

[Stargazer]

Our ward's EQP is an elder, a fairly newly returned and unmarried RM, and his counselors are both HP, one married with children 2 to 10 years old, and the other one is retired and no children living at home.

It would seem that the EQP is ridiculously young and inexperienced for the job of being one of the three most responsible adults in the ward (the other two being Bishop and Relief Society Pres.), but he is quite an impressive young man.  He was the EQP before the change, in fact.

[Regor]

I think I was a little naïve  as a new member of the church at the age of 20. I thought all callings were God inspired, but my testimony of this belief has been shaken over the years.  I have enjoyed and continue to enjoy serving in the church and had  many wonderful experiences. However in  retrospect I feel like a workhorse, receiving callings that  stymied my spiritual leadership growth by their nature.  While others conversely walked the leadership rout by socializing with people who are generally above their priesthood and calling station. I don’t roll like that. When I was in the primary I directed all  effort towards teaching the children, when in the scouts for years I put effort into helping the boys attend as many campouts as possible and learn the program so they would gain leadership, not try to show mine. As a result of my 31 years of continuous activity, serving a mission, supporting my leaders, and being a worth temple holder I’m now a 51 year old Elder. You don’t need to send me the Ensign article “Only an Elder” to make me feel better it only hurts when I think about it. I’m the only member in my family so I don’t have the shame of other siblings,  parents, or other family members but as my sons leave the home I believe they will become High Priest before me. I never  talk to anyone about my age and not being a High Priest, it would be added shame to let anyone I know personally know that it hurts. It drives my wife of 25 years crazy, and she says that the Rodney Dangerfield award she won in  college now goes to me. When the combining of Elders and High Priests quorums change happened she said, well that seals it, you’ll never be a high priest now.

 

My one son saw a members enter the bishopric that had not served a missions and said; ” look at so and so, they didn’t serve a mission and God thinks there a better leader then return missionaries,  I think I will do like them and not go on a mission”. I’m passed over for High Priest leadership while divorced and remarried men enter bishoprics and High council, almost always to join their friends in those positions. Like I said, it doesn’t bother me that much, I enjoy serving and am not a big ego type that seeks after higher profile calling, obviously. However, when you’re the young men’s president at an older age and  still an Elder you tend to get the look of “What is wrong with him?” I have to believe there is a degree of bias in who is chosen to serve in callings.  In the end my thought is that this is my trial in life, to live without ever having the opportunity to serve in High Priest callings. I guess I will not be one of the 144,000 High Priests teaching throughout the decimated world during the millennium. I will have too much family history to continue working on anyway. I think it is therapeutic to express my feelings somewhere rather than just keep them bottled up, good use of this forum. From an overall administrative standpoint I don’t know if the policy change will be that effective. For years my wife and I have discussed the priesthood being held by men and we both believe it’s because men have egos and need to lead. If we didn’t have a men driven leadership then we would be like all the other churches where the women run the church and the men stay home and watch football. So I should be grateful the Melchizedek priesthood under the office of Elder has offered me the opportunity to move away from my worship of football I experienced during the 70’s and part of the 80’s. Seriously, it has been a blessing to bless others including my family.

 

Maybe someday when I work though this it will be beneficial to another. I wasn’t able to help a newly baptized family in my previous ward, they felt the Ward was like a big high school. A popularity contest,  their parting words were; “ we had to deal with a mandatory  4 year popularity contest, why would we voluntarily  continue living the rest of our life like that?”  Their experience best describes the frustration, when maybe the more popular or friend of the leader is chosen instead of the best person. I know it’s not like this everywhere but unfortunately I have been in 4 wards like this.

[jbarm]

Proud 'old' Elder here.

My Bishop asked me if I wanted to get the 'old age' promotion to High Priest because I would be more comfortable in the High Priest's quorum in January of this year.

Turned him down.  Said I don't have a testimony of old age alone qualifying anyone to be High Priest.  I don't consider the move to HP to be a promotion in rank or prestige, based on my study of the topic.  Should be based on calling and inspiration.

Your salvation is not based on priesthood office in the Melchizedek priesthood.

Becoming a High Priest will become more rare in the future, so I probably will not become one. Just fine with me.

If someone is looking for validation of their membership based on priesthood office, I think they are looking for the wrong thing in the Church.

jmho

jb

[Regor]

Didn't intend to post again. Thought the first one didn't post and saw it later.

[CMZ]

On 4/9/2018 at 8:07 AM, Waylon said:

I fear I may have to go back to lesson-type presentations as opposed to the support group EQ I was running.

I haven't seen anything that indicates such will be the case.

[Calm]

18 minutes ago, Regor said:

Didn't intend to post again. Thought the first one didn't post and saw it later.

Thought I was having an intense deja vu moment.

[Regor]

I wouldn't say I'm bitter, as I said it really doesn't bother me that much that I'm still an Elder at the age of 51 because I know the church is true and God is in control. I have had to go through much toil since converting at 20 years old. My family and friends rejected me but I continued to push forward with faith is my savior Jesus Chris.  No need to make me feel better, As Kenny Loggins said in his song, I'm all right. This is a forum for discussion and that's what I'm doing at this moment, discussing my observation and experiences.

Being 51 and an Elder is not routine in my Stake. I am the oldest active Elder in my Ward, other than people that are on the list that no one has ever seen at church since they were teenagers and are now in their 50's to 90's. I have been active all my life. I have nothing to come out of either. I am quite complacent with my life. I have a nice family, I have a good education and job and plan on perusing a masters degree into my late 50's.

All I'm saying is the lord is pleased with the church collectively but not individually. Let me give you an example of the type of leader in the church that was less than a perfect example to me. During a Stake organized Scout outing a High Councilor purchased some Stake designed  patches for the boys in my Ward, I believe I was the scout master at that time. I had previous picked them up at the outing. Later on a Sunday that he was in our Ward I went to pay him with cash. He said; "I can't take the money from you on this Sabbath day." So, I went over to the clerk’s office put the money in an envelope, filled out the "other" section on the slip and told the clerk that the X High Council member needed to be paid with a check. The clerk said, "Why don't you just give him the cash"? I told him he wouldn't take it. The High councilmen wanted paid, he just didn't want my money on this day. So, the clerk cut a check, got the signatures  and handed it to him a few minutes later. My thought was... when the check was placed in his hand did he realize the church policy is that you can pay someone on Sunday. I hope he realized it had a very holier than thou appearance. I just wanted to give him the money for the patches so I didn't have to drop money in the mail, or chase him down somewhere on one of the other 6 days of the week.

That experience with the HC actually didn't surprise me at the moment because I saw him push his authority around else ware on other people. This is just a warning about priesthood leaders, remember, many are called but few are chosen, and why are they not chosen......The fact he was called to be a High councilor in my mind because he needed the experience and hopefully that Sunday was an experience he needed. I'm sure he did many fine works but that side of him definitely needed some polishing. The fact is that when you are 51 and not an Elder people look down at you. Many in the church look up to authority and equate it to righteousness, the Doctrine and Covenants actually talks about High Priest being holy and obtaining that position from good works. When you are older and not a High Priest you don't have to be bitter to get disrespected. You have to deal with probably half or more of the members having less respect for you. Like I said; My wife gave me the Rodney Dangerfield award, I now wear it with honor.     

 

 

[Waylon]

10 hours ago, CMZ said:

I haven't seen anything that indicates such will be the case.

Perhaps that's because, you know, you aren't the teacher in my combined quorum, you aren't in my ward, and you don't know a single thing about the dynamics therein?

[CMZ]

1 hour ago, Waylon said:

Perhaps that's because, you know, you aren't the teacher in my combined quorum, you aren't in my ward, and you don't know a single thing about the dynamics therein?

So sorry! No, I don't claim to know your local circumstances but if they are local circumstances then they are local circumstances. And if they are local circumstances then the general concept of high priests now meeting with the elders quorum is not the thing that created those local circumstances. The general Church guidelines for elders quorum should be conducted can be found here: https://www.lds.org/manual/come-follow-me/melchizedek-priesthood?lang=eng

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, Regor said:

I wouldn't say I'm bitter, as I said it really doesn't bother me that much that I'm still an Elder at the age of 51 because I know the church is true and God is in control. I have had to go through much toil since converting at 20 years old. My family and friends rejected me but I continued to push forward with faith is my savior Jesus Chris.  No need to make me feel better, As Kenny Loggins said in his song, I'm all right. This is a forum for discussion and that's what I'm doing at this moment, discussing my observation and experiences.

Being 51 and an Elder is not routine in my Stake. I am the oldest active Elder in my Ward, other than people that are on the list that no one has ever seen at church since they were teenagers and are now in their 50's to 90's. I have been active all my life. I have nothing to come out of either. I am quite complacent with my life. I have a nice family, I have a good education and job and plan on perusing a masters degree into my late 50's.

All I'm saying is the lord is pleased with the church collectively but not individually. Let me give you an example of the type of leader in the church that was less than a perfect example to me. During a Stake organized Scout outing a High Councilor purchased some Stake designed  patches for the boys in my Ward, I believe I was the scout master at that time. I had previous picked them up at the outing. Later on a Sunday that he was in our Ward I went to pay him with cash. He said; "I can't take the money from you on this Sabbath day." So, I went over to the clerk’s office put the money in an envelope, filled out the "other" section on the slip and told the clerk that the X High Council member needed to be paid with a check. The clerk said, "Why don't you just give him the cash"? I told him he wouldn't take it. The High councilmen wanted paid, he just didn't want my money on this day. So, the clerk cut a check, got the signatures  and handed it to him a few minutes later. My thought was... when the check was placed in his hand did he realize the church policy is that you can pay someone on Sunday. I hope he realized it had a very holier than thou appearance. I just wanted to give him the money for the patches so I didn't have to drop money in the mail, or chase him down somewhere on one of the other 6 days of the week.

That experience with the HC actually didn't surprise me at the moment because I saw him push his authority around else ware on other people. This is just a warning about priesthood leaders, remember, many are called but few are chosen, and why are they not chosen......The fact he was called to be a High councilor in my mind because he needed the experience and hopefully that Sunday was an experience he needed. I'm sure he did many fine works but that side of him definitely needed some polishing. The fact is that when you are 51 and not an Elder people look down at you. Many in the church look up to authority and equate it to righteousness, the Doctrine and Covenants actually talks about High Priest being holy and obtaining that position from good works. When you are older and not a High Priest you don't have to be bitter to get disrespected. You have to deal with probably half or more of the members having less respect for you. Like I said; My wife gave me the Rodney Dangerfield award, I now wear it with honor.     

 

 

I am so impressed with you...your honor and sincerity and the very fact that you are humble..with pride only in the best things.

[Stargazer]

On ‎5‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 5:07 AM, Regor said:

I’m passed over for High Priest leadership

Interesting. I was ordained HP at age 51. At the time I was quite content being an Elder, meeting with the Elders, and serving as the Ward Clerk. When the bishop brought up the idea of calling me to be a high priest, I told him that I didn't have a preference, and that it was a matter of what the Lord wanted.  I was in no hurry for it.  If I had never been called to receive that priesthood office, it wouldn't have bothered me at all.  And in fact, being a high priest changed nothing. Sure I meet with the (mainly) older guys in priesthood meeting, but am I more comfortable there than with the young studs?  Not really.  The main difference between us is in age and longevity, and the experience that comes with it, not our priesthood office.  

The only authority an elder lacks, in comparison with a high priest, is the authority to ordain other high priests.  This is why I don't consider it a "promotion" to be ordained a high priest. The only reason to ordain a man a high priest, in my humble opinion, is due to the requirements of certain callings, such as serving in a bishopric, stake presidency, high council, patriarch, and general authority.  Which is exactly the way it is now.

I am actually very, very glad that the late priesthood organizational change occurred. In our Elder's Quorum, the president is an elder. His counselors are high priests.  No longer will this silly notion of being "promoted" exist in the Church.  Or so I hope.  Our service as priesthood holders should be pure, and service-oriented, not hedged about by petty jealousies in respect of rank.  

If you're living in a ward or stake where people whisper to each other, cluck-clucking about the reasons why you have not been "raised" to the rank of high priest, then please let me know where you live, so I make sure I never move there.  It sounds as bad as Duncan's weird stake up there in icy Canada.

Edited May 19, 2018 by Stargazer

[Regor]

I think an entire church generation will need to pass before we fully begin to lose the status misconceptions about becoming a High Priest. Even the Bishop of Stargazer was concerned about “calling him to be a High Priest”, what is the calling in becoming a High Priest? In the case of Staregazer there was none, it was just to attend meetings with the High Priest.

 As we all agree, becoming a High Priest is an “Office” for executing specific callings. If there wasn’t some pre supposed status around becoming a High Priest the Bishop would have simply told Stargazer  to start attending the High Priest quorum, it he would like, or the Elders, it’s up to him. I have heard of that before, some people have told me they were asked by their Bishops if they wanted to start attending the High Priest meeting without ever being ordained a High Priest.

You will still never completely kill the status police, there will just be more Elders at 50 years old going forward with the change, since an entire quorum of leadership has been eliminated. You want to shake things up, I would love to see the leadership just ordain everyone that reaches 30 years in the priesthood a High Priest, they could say, if you have been around that long you are wise in your ways and we want you ready to serve as a Bishop, councilor, or in the High Council at any moment, without needing to also ordain you to be a High Priest at the same time. That way when a man retires and moves to a retirement Ward no one will ask him what was wrong with him that he never became a High Priest.

 

[Stargazer]

2 hours ago, Regor said:

I think an entire church generation will need to pass before we fully begin to lose the status misconceptions about becoming a High Priest. Even the Bishop of Stargazer was concerned about “calling him to be a High Priest”, what is the calling in becoming a High Priest? In the case of Staregazer there was none, it was just to attend meetings with the High Priest.

But it was customary in my stake to call the more elder elders to the high priests quorum, at least those with temple recommends.  This seemed to usually happen some time after age 45. I don't believe there were any exceptions made. 

I really think you're being too sensitive about not being "advanced".  And possibly too concerned that others wonder why not.  Bunch of nosey parkers and snooty to boot -- they don't deserve consideration in this regard.  Besides all that, they might have been almost about to "advance" you when the reorganization occurred.  You'll probably never know, unless you ask.  And I suggest you don't. Ignorance is bliss, sometimes.

2 hours ago, Regor said:

 As we all agree, becoming a High Priest is an “Office” for executing specific callings. If there wasn’t some pre supposed status around becoming a High Priest the Bishop would have simply told Stargazer  to start attending the High Priest quorum, it he would like, or the Elders, it’s up to him. I have heard of that before, some people have told me they were asked by their Bishops if they wanted to start attending the High Priest meeting without ever being ordained a High Priest.

I knew at least one elderly elder who declined the ordination because he liked being an elder.  Even though he attended the high priests group during priesthood meeting.  

2 hours ago, Regor said:

You will still never completely kill the status police, there will just be more Elders at 50 years old going forward with the change, since an entire quorum of leadership has been eliminated. You want to shake things up, I would love to see the leadership just ordain everyone that reaches 30 years in the priesthood a High Priest, they could say, if you have been around that long you are wise in your ways and we want you ready to serve as a Bishop, councilor, or in the High Council at any moment, without needing to also ordain you to be a High Priest at the same time. That way when a man retires and moves to a retirement Ward no one will ask him what was wrong with him that he never became a High Priest.

The matter has been settled.  Unless you're called to a position that requires it, you'll stay an Elder -- and could even preside over high priests, if you are called to be a quorum president.  Eventually, even in the status-conscious wards the matter will no longer be at issue.  For one thing, when you look in LDS Tools you can't tell which priesthood office a brother holds. So it isn't going to come up for most members.

After awhile, you probably won't have a thing to complain about, because everyone will have forgotten, if they even knew in the first place.

[Regor]

I think the change will help stop the Status games. It definitely goes on. We have one guy in our Ward where about 2 years ago out of the blue he was ordained a High Priest at the age of 34.  He was not being called to any calling requiring a High Priest office, and has not been since. His dad had a High Priest calling and lets say a higher profile calling. Those are the types of things that go on that make you go Hummm. Can anyone explain that one?

6 hours ago, Stargazer said:

But it was customary in my stake to call the more elder elders to the high priests quorum, at least those with temple recommends.  This seemed to usually happen some time after age 45. I don't believe there were any exceptions made. 

I really think you're being too sensitive about not being "advanced".  And possibly too concerned that others wonder why not.  Bunch of nosey parkers and snooty to boot -- they don't deserve consideration in this regard.  Besides all that, they might have been almost about to "advance" you when the reorganization occurred.  You'll probably never know, unless you ask.  And I suggest you don't. Ignorance is bliss, sometimes.

I knew at least one elderly elder who declined the ordination because he liked being an elder.  Even though he attended the high priests group during priesthood meeting.  

The matter has been settled.  Unless you're called to a position that requires it, you'll stay an Elder -- and could even preside over high priests, if you are called to be a quorum president.  Eventually, even in the status-conscious wards the matter will no longer be at issue.  For one thing, when you look in LDS Tools you can't tell which priesthood office a brother holds. So it isn't going to come up for most members.

After awhile, you probably won't have a thing to complain about, because everyone will have forgotten, if they even knew in the first place.

 

[Stargazer]

16 hours ago, Regor said:

I think the change will help stop the Status games. It definitely goes on. We have one guy in our Ward where about 2 years ago out of the blue he was ordained a High Priest at the age of 34.  He was not being called to any calling requiring a High Priest office, and has not been since. His dad had a High Priest calling and lets say a higher profile calling. Those are the types of things that go on that make you go Hummm. Can anyone explain that one?

 

Nope!  But then I don't propose to second-guess those called to preside, unless they really clearly hose it.  And I don't know this person nor his dad, so I would not presume to judge whether either is worthy of the calling. 

There were a couple of very very young members of the Q12 called in the past.  Abraham O. Woodruff was called to the Twelve at age 23, by his dad, Wilford Woodruff (he died at age 31 of smallpox 7 years later). Hyrum M. Smith was called to the Twelve at age 29 by his father, Joseph F. Smith (he died early also, at age 45).  What might be said about this apparent nepotism?  Well, I don't know, but despite the outward oddness of this interfamiliality, both men served well.  Hyrum, incidentally, is Elder M. Russell Ballard's grandfather.

In my old stake there is a particular family which has produced a couple of stake presidents, a few bishops, a patriarch, and a few high council members. In my observation all of them are faithful, loving, and capable men, who have served in their callings in outstanding ways.  It would appear that the Lord sometimes sends leaders into particular bloodlines. I don't know why, but I guess I don't need to know.

[Regor]

My bloodline must be just short of serf status if we equate leadership to being ordained without a need for the ordination and only because of the bloodline. Now were back to ordinations to High Priest representing a superior status. This talk of superior leadership bloodline comparing them to early Woodruff and Smith blood lines instead of just an office to execute a calling.

[Calm]

It is less likely a "bloodline" imo and more likely being exposed to good examples and likely being given the opportunity to practice what they saw when younger (from what I have seen, seeing good examples is not enough, having effective parents may even lead to not attempting to develop those skills one sees for oneself since many parents provide when needed...thus one may sometime see a strong leader whose children mostly leave the Church out of disinterest, waste educational opportunities, or are horrible at self sufficiency, lack prudence, etc).