ksfisher Posted October 6, 2018 Posted October 6, 2018 3 minutes ago, halconero said: What you think it indicates that I think, and what I actually think, are two different things. Your reading isn’t accurate. You seem to be saying Good bishops (those worth their salt) will have the ward mission leader at ward council. Less good bishops (those not eorth their salt) will not. The First Presidency seems to be saying that it is up to the individual circumstnaces of each unit, known to that bishop, whether or not the ward mission leader is invited.
halconero Posted October 6, 2018 Posted October 6, 2018 Just now, ksfisher said: You seem to be saying Good bishops (those worth their salt) will have the ward mission leader at ward council. Less good bishops (those not eorth their salt) will not. The First Presidency seems to be saying that it is up to the individual circumstnaces of each unit, known to that bishop, whether or not the ward mission leader is invited. I leave more wiggle room in my original comment for good Bishops than you think I am.
bluebell Posted October 6, 2018 Posted October 6, 2018 1 hour ago, ksfisher said: “Counselors in the elders quorum and Relief Society presidencies, the ward mission leader (if called), and the ward temple and family history leader (if called) may be invited to particular ward council meetings as circumstances dictate.” Our ward holds a weekly coordination meeting, led by the ward mission leader, attended by the ward and full time missionaries. Our ward does that as well.
halconero Posted October 6, 2018 Posted October 6, 2018 To clarify: The letter says that the ward and temple/family history leaders may still be invited as circumstances dictate. If circumstances dictate, such as an investigator approaching baptism, or a family preparing to be endowed, I think it’s likely (expressed as “probably”) that good Bishops will still invite the relevant leaders. Are there circumstances in these situations where it’s better to keep the meeting more limited? Sure. Do I think under normal circumstances, given these conditions, that a good Bishops will still invite these leaders (if called)? Yup. In my experience, when the Church makes something optional, less engaged leaders will permanently stop calling/inviting/doing whatever thing was previously compulsory, rather than taking it as something to be deployed by the spirit and strategically. Good leaders will continue to deploy/invite/call whatever was previously compulsory. This isn’t me saying the Church made a bad call. This is me saying that a good Bishop will very likely continue to use the WML/TFH Leader. Very likely meaning under normal circumstances, not all. If I meant that good Bishops must, under all circumstances, continue to have the WML there, then I would have said “a bishop worth their salt will continue to invite...,” instead, I added the word “probably.” There’s wiggle room there. I’m not an absolutist. 1
Buckeye Posted October 6, 2018 Posted October 6, 2018 3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said: I'm not seeing anything very significant here, but I have a few questions. So, is the Temple & Family History Leader a new position? I don't recall that calling. We had a Family History Center director, but that doesn't sound like the same thing. Is the new Family /Temple leader a member of the ward council? Having the EQ supervise Family History/temple sounds like the same stewardship the HPGL used to have. Or is there something more to it that I'm missing? The RS part seems very small. It sounds very similar to the old practice of having committees in quorums and RS. The biggest part is having the EQP oversee the ward mission and mission leader. Will the WML still be a part of the ward council? Big change is that the church is finally taking things off the bishops plate and putting them on others. This is a good move. One I requested specifically in my stake a few years ago. Bishops simply have too much responsibility for a lay position. This structural problem is at the root of most of the issues that the church can fix (there’s many more if course that it can’t)
Doctrine 612 Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 Is the Sunday school president also under the elders quorum?
Scott Lloyd Posted October 10, 2018 Posted October 10, 2018 (edited) On 10/6/2018 at 8:30 AM, smac97 said: Our bishop just got a letter from the First Presidency via email about new changes to the responsibilities of the Elders Quorum and Relief Society Presidents. Here are the basics: 1. EQP may be assigned to oversee member missionary work, temple and family history work in the ward (usually to be delegated to counselors in Elders Quorum presidency). 2. EQ Counselor will supervise Ward Mission Leader (who will be a Melchizedek Priesthood holder). 3. EQ Counselor will supervise ward temple and family history leader (who will be a Melchizedek Priesthood holder). 4. Relief Society Presidency can have a counselor assigned to help with member missionary work, and the other counselor assigned to help with ward temple and family history work. 5. Bishop coordinates "all aspects of the work of salvation in the ward council." Ward Council usually meets weekly, but may meet less frequently (our ward has already been doing this for a while). Thanks, -Smac In my ward this has already been in place for months, at least where temple and family history work is concerned. I’m curious as to some terminology used in the letter your bishop received. Did it really use the term “temple and family history leader”? The reason I ask is that I have that calling in my ward, and I have had the understanding that the title of my calling is temple and family history consultant. Edited October 10, 2018 by Scott Lloyd
Recommended Posts