The Spirit Of Discernment

[Marginal Gains]

In a conversation about the seeming lack of spiritual discernment shown by Church Leaders, poster Bluebell made this comment:

We had a really lengthy discussion about that issue a few weeks ago. If you are interested I’m pretty sure it’s searchable on here. I don’t know about anyone else but I don’t see any reason to hash it out again here. 

 My short answer is that I don’t believe the gift of discernment works the way most people in the church believe it does. I think we have a spiritually immature understanding of it. 

I would be interested in bluebell expanding this response to explain in what ways we misunderstand how the spirit of discernment is supposed to work, and what level of maturity we are missing.

[Calm]

You seemed to have ignored her comment "I don’t see any reason to hash it out again here."

[Marginal Gains]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

You seemed to have ignored her comment "I don’t see any reason to hash it out again here."

I assumed (rightly or wrongly) that “here” referred to that particular thread.

[Duncan]

it isn't a scriptural term,if anything. If it is something given to Bishops and leaders then you wonder why there are locks on temple lockers, if we are all honest with our fellow man we wouldn't be stealing from them in the Temple. Plus with all these stories about lying and how did they not know, like the Elder Richard Lyman of the 12 story, 20 years or something he was into shady something or other, how did the other Q12 not know until the 1940's? 

[Marginal Gains]

For reference:

Quote

 

Discernment, Gift of 

See also Gifts of the Spirit

To understand or know something through the power of the Spirit. The gift of discernment is one of the gifts of the Spirit. It includes perceiving the true character of people and the source and meaning of spiritual manifestations.

 

 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/discernment-gift-of

Edited April 26, 2018 by Marginal Gains

[The Nehor]

Yes, we know you think Bishop’s should be always on omniscient lie detectors. I think you have that straw man on the ropes. If you give it a few more good blows you can probably take it out.

[Duncan]

21 minutes ago, Marginal Gains said:

For reference:

 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/discernment-gift-of

I don't know the first scripture in the list doesn't say anything about discernment, in fact it says that we human look on the appearance, when God, whom we should be like, looks on the heart

the second verse talks about calling evil good, which is a good thing but do they know that the evil is not good or they do but refuse to acknowledge it?

I don't think lying is a thing of God

discerning of spirits? my spirit or the holy ghost or what spirit exactley

Ammon discerning his thoughts would apply

the spirit piercing someone talks about the spirit discerning, not us

church leaders given the ability t discern the gifts of the spirits, I don't think lying to church leaders is a gift of the spirit

if we are filled with light we can comprehend all things-does all mean all? or just some things? what constitutes as all? how much my lunch will cost before I go to a restaurant today? where Nephi was buried?

Moses beholding the earth, but he didn't seem to know to ask for help? and his FIL had to tell him-I mean it doesn't mean once you have it you got it but can come and go and I don't know when or why

[Marginal Gains]

24 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yes, we know you think Bishop’s should be always on omniscient lie detectors. I think you have that straw man on the ropes. If you give it a few more good blows you can probably take it out.

Well, I think we have a couple of very recent examples of slightly more senior leaders where the gift of perceiving the true character of people seems to have failed....remind me, who appoints Mission Presidents?

[stemelbow]

Meh...it seems to work sometimes, at least.  Most of my leaders over the years have discerned me to be an evil guy in spite of my efforts to feign concern and interest for others.  

[JAHS]

I am reminded of something Elder Oaks said regarding the Mark Hoffman Incident:

"In order to perform their personal ministries, Church leaders cannot be suspicious and questioning of each of the hundreds of people they meet each year. Ministers of the gospel function best in an atmosphere of trust and love. In that kind of atmosphere, they fail to detect a few deceivers, but that is the price they pay to increase their effectiveness in counseling, comforting, and blessing the hundreds of honest and sincere people they see. It is better for a Church leader to be occasionally disappointed than to be constantly suspicious."

I think this is part of the reason some are able to deceive and not be discovered by discernment. If church leaders have no reason to even suspect someone of deception or poor character they don't give it any thought and are therefore not receptive to any discernment about them, especially if that person has a good reputation and success of service and holding various church callings throughout their lives. 

[Marginal Gains]

On 4/26/2018 at 8:59 AM, JAHS said:

I am reminded of something Elder Oaks said regarding the Mark Hoffman Incident:

"In order to perform their personal ministries, Church leaders cannot be suspicious and questioning of each of the hundreds of people they meet each year. Ministers of the gospel function best in an atmosphere of trust and love. In that kind of atmosphere, they fail to detect a few deceivers, but that is the price they pay to increase their effectiveness in counseling, comforting, and blessing the hundreds of honest and sincere people they see. It is better for a Church leader to be occasionally disappointed than to be constantly suspicious."

I think this is part of the reason some are able to deceive and not be discovered by discernment. If church leaders have no reason to even suspect someone of deception or poor character they don't give it any thought and are therefore not receptive to any discernment about them, especially if that person has a good reputation and success of service and holding various church callings throughout their lives. 

Let me re-word the quote slightly to show what Oaks is unwittingly saying...

"In order to perform their personal ministries, Church leaders cannot be suspicious and questioning of each of the hundreds of people they meet Mission Presidents they call each year. Ministers of the gospel function best in an atmosphere of trust and love. In that kind of atmosphere, they fail to detect a few deceivers, but that is the price they pay to increase their effectiveness in counseling, comforting, and blessing the hundreds of honest and sincere people they see. It is better for a Church leader to be occasionally disappointed few female missionaries to be sexually abused than for Church Leaders to be constantly suspicious."

And remember, “We don’t apologise”.

No changing quotes.  ~Mods

[JAHS]

3 minutes ago, Marginal Gains said:

Let me re-word the quote slightly to show what Oaks is unwittingly saying...

"In order to perform their personal ministries, Church leaders cannot be suspicious and questioning of each of the hundreds of people they meet Mission Presidents they call each year. Ministers of the gospel function best in an atmosphere of trust and love. In that kind of atmosphere, they fail to detect a few deceivers, but that is the price they pay to increase their effectiveness in counseling, comforting, and blessing the hundreds of honest and sincere people they see. It is better for a Church leader to be occasionally disappointed few female missionaries to be sexually abused than for Church Leaders to be constantly suspicious."

And remember, “We don’t apologise”.

I wish the system could be as perfect as you want it to be, but people have their agency to deceive and they have their agency to fail to use discernment to thoroughly investigate someone's background or character. 

[ALarson]

44 minutes ago, Marginal Gains said:

Well, I think we have a couple of very recent examples of slightly more senior leaders where the gift of perceiving the true character of people seems to have failed....remind me, who appoints Mission Presidents?

If people can just be honest here, I believe the truth is that our leaders are humans who make mistakes.  Sometimes they call their friends to callings because they want to work with their friends.  Sometimes they call men (or women) who have a track record of doing well in leadership positions and they know they won't have to worry that the job will get done and know they can depend on them.  Sometimes they call family members.   Sometimes they call strangers because they feel inspired to call them.

Sometimes they get it right and sometimes they get it wrong and mistakes are made.

Regarding Joseph Bishop, it was a huge mistake to call him to be the president of the MTC where he'd have stewardship over hundreds of trusting young women.  The leaders definitely got that one wrong and it led to tragic actions and consequences (for the young women involved and for the church as well now).

Our leaders are fallible and we can never forget that.  We each have to use our own discretion and our own inspiration regarding anything asked of us or regarding anything that affects our children or family members.  IMO, that's the bottom line for me.

It's just amazing to me to see the lengths some will go to on here rather than to admit the leaders were just simply wrong to call Joseph Bishop to serve as the MTC president.  They'll agree that our leaders make mistakes, but then refuse to admit church leaders were wrong when it is so obviously the case.

Edited April 26, 2018 by ALarson

[Tacenda]

41 minutes ago, JAHS said:

I am reminded of something Elder Oaks said regarding the Mark Hoffman Incident:

"In order to perform their personal ministries, Church leaders cannot be suspicious and questioning of each of the hundreds of people they meet each year. Ministers of the gospel function best in an atmosphere of trust and love. In that kind of atmosphere, they fail to detect a few deceivers, but that is the price they pay to increase their effectiveness in counseling, comforting, and blessing the hundreds of honest and sincere people they see. It is better for a Church leader to be occasionally disappointed than to be constantly suspicious."

I think this is part of the reason some are able to deceive and not be discovered by discernment. If church leaders have no reason to even suspect someone of deception or poor character they don't give it any thought and are therefore not receptive to any discernment about them, especially if that person has a good reputation and success of service and holding various church callings throughout their lives. 

We need to step away from thinking the LDS church is the Lord's only church. Especially if the leaders aren't given the right signals from God, since a MTC president, mission president etc, has had many other callings leading up to their positions.

The signal wasn't there, or was there, and the leader who called these men, didn't get it. Why? IMO, it's because we aren't the only true church out there, there are no special groups that are in the only true church. Sure, we as individuals can find what is true for us, but the idea that we as a church have special means of communication with God  is ludicrous, and only hurts individuals out there that think they need the church to get it or else they won't get it from the right source. 

Edited April 26, 2018 by Tacenda

[CV75]

8 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

In a conversation about the seeming lack of spiritual discernment shown by Church Leaders, poster Bluebell made this comment:

We had a really lengthy discussion about that issue a few weeks ago. If you are interested I’m pretty sure it’s searchable on here. I don’t know about anyone else but I don’t see any reason to hash it out again here. 

 My short answer is that I don’t believe the gift of discernment works the way most people in the church believe it does. I think we have a spiritually immature understanding of it. 

I would be interested in bluebell expanding this response to explain in what ways we misunderstand how the spirit of discernment is supposed to work, and what level of maturity we are missing.

I suspect a “seeming” lack of spiritual discernment is evidently based on a few exceptions to the norm, and a conclusion drawn not by objective analysis but by suspicion. It is easy to identify an offense, but virtually impossible to identify when one has been prevented. So you have to provide some research about this claim.

A far as expanding bluebell's response, I would agree it can be searched out as a topic on this board, and so recommend you do that and then ask more searching questions.

[JAHS]

34 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

We need to step away from thinking the LDS church is the Lord's only church. Especially if the leaders aren't given the right signals from God, since a MTC president, mission president etc, has had many other callings leading up to their positions.

The signal wasn't there, or was there, and the leader who called these men, didn't get it. Why? IMO, it's because we aren't the only true church out there, there are no special groups that are in the only true church. Sure, we as individuals can find what is true for us, but the idea that we as a church have special means of communication with God  is ludicrous, and only hurts individuals out there that think they need the church to get it or else they won't get it from the right source. 

Many churches out there have some truths, but the LDS Church is the only Church that has the fullness of the Gospel and the priesthood authority to perform saving ordinances, which the other churches do not have.
Just because there are some imperfect members in leadership positions who choose to commit sin does not alter that fact.  JMHO

[kllindley]

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

If people can just be honest here, I believe the truth is that our leaders are humans who make mistakes.  Sometimes they call their friends to callings because they want to work with their friends.  Sometimes they call men (or women) who have a track record of doing well in leadership positions and they know they won't have to worry that the job will get done and know they can depend on them.  Sometimes they call family members.   Sometimes they call strangers because they feel inspired to call them.

Sometimes they get it right and sometimes they get it wrong and mistakes are made.

Regarding Joseph Bishop, it was a huge mistake to call him to be the president of the MTC where he'd have stewardship over hundreds of trusting young women.  The leaders definitely got that one wrong and it led to tragic actions and consequences (for the young women involved and for the church as well now).

Our leaders are fallible and we can never forget that.  We each have to use our own discretion and our own inspiration regarding anything asked of us or regarding anything that affects our children or family members.  IMO, that's the bottom line for me.

It's just amazing to me to see the lengths some will go to on here rather than to admit the leaders were just simply wrong to call Joseph Bishop to serve as the MTC president.  They'll agree that our leaders make mistakes, but then refuse to admit church leaders were wrong when it is so obviously the case.

I just don't think you've accurately represented or understood it position. You assume it requires going to great lengths to refuse to take the role of judging someone outside of our stewardship. 

[kllindley]

9 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

In a conversation about the seeming lack of spiritual discernment shown by Church Leaders, poster Bluebell made this comment:

We had a really lengthy discussion about that issue a few weeks ago. If you are interested I’m pretty sure it’s searchable on here. I don’t know about anyone else but I don’t see any reason to hash it out again here. 

 My short answer is that I don’t believe the gift of discernment works the way most people in the church believe it does. I think we have a spiritually immature understanding of it. 

I would be interested in bluebell expanding this response to explain in what ways we misunderstand how the spirit of discernment is supposed to work, and what level of maturity we are missing.

It's interesting that you start a thread about the "spirit of discernment." 

Yet in the reference you quoted, it is consistently referred to as the Gift of discernment. Have you read much about what the scriptures and the Church teach about Gifts of the Spirit? 

[ALarson]

3 minutes ago, kllindley said:

I just don't think you've accurately represented or understood it position. You assume it requires going to great lengths to refuse to take the role of judging someone outside of our stewardship. 

No, you've misunderstood me.  I'm referring to a discussion on another thread (but should have been more clear).

I don't believe it requires going to great lengths to admit that mistakes are made by our leaders.  They do make mistakes....on a general level, on an area level and on stake & ward levels.  It's to be expected when fallible humans are involved.   There's only been one perfect man living on this earth.  We can continue to strive to be more like him, but none of our leaders are perfect. 

[HappyJackWagon]

1 hour ago, JAHS said:

I wish the system could be as perfect as you want it to be, but people have their agency to deceive and they have their agency to fail to use discernment to thoroughly investigate someone's background or character. 

So perhaps the church should get away from creating an expectation that leaders can and will discern righteousness. It's a part of every worthiness interview. It impacts baptisms, priesthood ordinations, temple recommends, callings etc. If they don't have the ability to consistently and accurately discern, they shouldn't create the expectation for members to believe that they do.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

Well, I think we have a couple of very recent examples of slightly more senior leaders where the gift of perceiving the true character of people seems to have failed....remind me, who appoints Mission Presidents?

Yep, set the straw man back up so you can beat on it some more. Someday if you drink your milk and eat your veggies you might grow big and strong and can attack arguments people actually make. One day.

[kllindley]

16 minutes ago, ALarson said:

No, you've misunderstood me.  I'm referring to a discussion on another thread (but should have been more clear).

I don't believe it requires going to great lengths to admit that mistakes are made by our leaders.  They do make mistakes....on a general level, on an area level and on stake & ward levels.  It's to be expected when fallible humans are involved.   There's only been one perfect man living on this earth.  We can continue to strive to be more like him, but none of our leaders are perfect. 

And who is claiming that they don't make mistakes? It seems to me that people here are only refusing to make judgements about a leader's actions without knowing God's will in the matter. 

[JAHS]

25 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

So perhaps the church should get away from creating an expectation that leaders can and will discern righteousness. It's a part of every worthiness interview. It impacts baptisms, priesthood ordinations, temple recommends, callings etc. If they don't have the ability to consistently and accurately discern, they shouldn't create the expectation for members to believe that they do.

It is certainly the hope that they do, and in most cases they do just that. But in my 64 years in the church I know that slip ups can happen and am not so surprised when they do. 
But I still can manage to trust most every member to be true and faithful.......until they are not. 
Along with creating the expectation that leaders accurately discern, we are also taught that it sometimes doesn't happen that way because of everyone's lack of perfection in this life.
At least that has been my experience.

 

Edited April 26, 2018 by JAHS

[ALarson]

8 minutes ago, kllindley said:

And who is claiming that they don't make mistakes?

I find that some readily admit that our leaders aren't infallible and yet refuse to admit when there has been a mistake made (or state where they believe a mistake has been made by any past or present leaders).  Just my observation....

9 minutes ago, kllindley said:

It seems to me that people here are only refusing to make judgements about a leader's actions without knowing God's will in the matter.

Well, I believe that what took place with Bishop could not have been God's will.  We have enough witnesses, statements, and evidence of his past behavior to know that God would not have wanted him to be taking young women down into a secret basement room where he was alone with them.  That's not hard to discern and we have every right to make judgments of discernment when it involves endangering anyone (most especially a child or youth).

[Jeanne]

In my personal experience, I have often found it odd that some would disregard my gut feelings..as if that was not always the way to go....but have such regard for discernment.  To me..it is somewhat one and the same.