Prof Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 10 hours ago, mfbukowski said: We should just then by that logic call people "Seventy Jones" etc. but I don't see that happening I have often wondered why we don't call people Seventy Jones. I've always heard it Elder Jones of the Seventy. Not sure why.
Stargazer Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, rchorse said: From what I was told, it's because of that German tendency to take titles too far that the saints where I am were instructed by some general authority or other to not get hung up on the titles. All I know is that in my stake no one uses the titles, and they're definitely not liberal in other ways. That's what we were told, too. In the one branch I served in, the branch president was always referred to as "Bruder Bunde". In the three wards I served in (this was the Duesseldorf Stake, btw), the bishops were occasionally referred to as "Bischoff ...", but usually "Bruder ...". Edited December 22, 2018 by Stargazer 1
Duncan Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 Anybody younger than me, if I know them well enough, I call them by their first name, regardless of what their past calling was 1
Thinking Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 (edited) FWIW Quote Because of the importance of the office of bishop, considerable space is devoted to this calling in the scriptures and in the writings and sermons of the General Authorities. As far as I am aware, the answer to your question is not available in these sources. This may suggest that the custom of referring to a released bishop by this title is acceptable. There should be no compulsion to continue to use the title over a long period of time, however. Certainly, the first few weeks or months after a bishop’s release is the period when the members of the ward will call him by that title. It is probable that as time passes the inclination to use the title bishop will be replaced by brother. The axiom “once a bishop always a bishop” is correct because the office of bishop is an office of ordination conferred by the laying on of hands, the same as the Melchizedek Priesthood office of elder or high priest. As a stake president, I always referred to a released bishop as bishop, and even to this day, years later, the same salutation is used. Such a relationship continues to bring back memories of times spent in a very special calling. Latter-day Saints use the titles of bishop and president as names of respect. When they do so, they are recognizing that the Lord has called the person to a noble calling and their sustaining help is constant. They also know that when a bishop is released he no longer presides over the ward. The concern which one might voice in calling a former bishop by that title would be if members of the ward believed that he was continuing in the bishop’s role of counselor. Wise released bishops understand that when ward members come to them as though they were active bishops they refer them to their present bishop. If I were introducing a former bishop to a congregation or audience, I would refer to him as brother and then possibly mention he is a former bishop. Edited December 22, 2018 by Thinking 1
Bernard Gui Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 9 hours ago, rchorse said: I think we should just let people call each other what they want as long as it's not insulting or offensive. It was a culture shock for me to move from Sandy, Utah to Germany and hear people addressing the stake president by his first name. Now that I'm used to it, though, I much prefer it. Besides, if we're all really brothers and sisters, we should use whatever is agreeable to the one being addressed. I don't call my actual brothers "Brother rchorse". I call them Jim or Bob or whatever they have asked me to call them. Sometimes I wish we could go back to the days of saying Brother Joseph, Brother Parley, Brother Brigham, Sister Eliza. 3
katherine the great Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 So interesting to read everyone's opinions and experiences on this topic. It seems quite varied. My experience is that a Bishop was still often (not always) referred to as "Bishop" after release back in the 70's and 80's--maybe into the 90's. It seems like it started to wane after that. By the time the 21st century rolled around, all my bishops were just my friends so I always called them by their first names unless I was at church. I don't recall the majority of people in my ward continuing with the title for very long after release. 1
Jeanne Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 (edited) From experience...a real weird thing is to work with a former bishop. Sometimes I would call him bishop..and other time by his first name...he, by the way, preferred his own name. Of course, usually, I just go..."hey you...how are ya??"😋 They are just people...in any case...I never got called Sister RS visiting teacher coordinator. Edited December 22, 2018 by Jeanne
Stargazer Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 13 minutes ago, Jeanne said: From experience...a real weird thing is to work with a former bishop. Sometimes I would call him bishop..and other time by his first name...he, by the way, preferred his own name. Of course, usually, I just go..."hey you...how are ya??"😋 They are just people...in any case...I never got called Sister RS visiting teacher coordinator. Out of respect for her calling, I like to occasionally address our RS president as President. I'm not sure if she likes me doing this, but there it is. 2
Jeanne Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 4 minutes ago, Stargazer said: Out of respect for her calling, I like to occasionally address our RS president as President. I'm not sure if she likes me doing this, but there it is. Well...I kind of like that...she deserves just as much respect as a Bishop.
JAHS Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said: Sometimes I wish we could go back to the days of saying Brother Joseph, Brother Parley, Brother Brigham, Sister Eliza. I had a stake president who called everyone Brother (insert first name). I like that too.
JAHS Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 Elder Boyd K. Packer said: Besides identifying a specific ordained office in the Melchizedek Priesthood, the title “elder” is used to identify anyone holding the higher priesthood. Therefore Seventies and Apostles may be referred to as “elder” (see D&C 20:38). This would include High Priests as well or is anyone who still holds the office of Seventy in local congregations.
JAHS Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 Here's an article from a 1980 New Era magazine “If a bishop in the ward has just been released and another bishop put in, do you refer to the former bishop as brother or as bishop?” Answer/Brother Roy W. Doxey Because of the importance of the office of bishop, considerable space is devoted to this calling in the scriptures and in the writings and sermons of the General Authorities. As far as I am aware, the answer to your question is not available in these sources. This may suggest that the custom of referring to a released bishop by this title is acceptable. There should be no compulsion to continue to use the title over a long period of time, however. Certainly, the first few weeks or months after a bishop’s release is the period when the members of the ward will call him by that title. It is probable that as time passes the inclination to use the title bishop will be replaced by brother. The axiom “once a bishop always a bishop” is correct because the office of bishop is an office of ordination conferred by the laying on of hands, the same as the Melchizedek Priesthood office of elder or high priest.
strappinglad Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 A friend of mine has the last name " Elder ". On his mission he was Elder Elder. At home he was Brother Elder , then brother Jim. At one calling he was President Elder. Things can get strange. 4
Bob Crockett Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, rockpond said: I currently live in a ward with three of my former bishops (the earliest serving bishop was released over 15 years ago). I still greet them all as bishop. I see it as a sign of respect for the great service they provided and the positive impact they had on my life. Nobody has ever given me the impression that it’s an unusual practice. However, there are certainly times when I am speaking to others about those bishops and I’ll drop the title recognizing that he wasn’t ever a bishop to them and they might be confused as to who I am talking about. It may be a sign of disrespect to the current bishop. It is no big deal really, but I once saw a federal judge go off the rails when the attorneys referred to another attorney as "judge" because he had recently retired and returned to attorney practice. It is very unsettling to me to have somebody refer to me as "bishop" despite the fact that it has been decades and a lot has happened since then. Edited December 22, 2018 by Bob Crockett 1
The Nehor Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 2 hours ago, Stargazer said: Out of respect for her calling, I like to occasionally address our RS president as President. I'm not sure if she likes me doing this, but there it is. I do that for the Elder's Quorum President and every one of the presidents of the auxiliaries (Relief Society, Young Men, Young Women, Primary, Sunday School) unless it is an informal conversation and then only if I knew them well. That is currently just the Sunday School President. I did know the Relief Society President that well but we just got a new Presidency. 1
Thinking Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 (edited) In my capacity as high school teacher, I have had the opportunity to coach a few different sports at different times. All of my former athletes still call me Coach when they see me. The current coaches take no offense. Why would they? They know that there were coaches before them. I think a lot of members view the bishop in the same way athletes view their coaches. Edited December 22, 2018 by Thinking 2
Jeanne Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 25 minutes ago, strappinglad said: A friend of mine has the last name " Elder ". On his mission he was Elder Elder. At home he was Brother Elder , then brother Jim. At one calling he was President Elder. Things can get strange. Why doesn't this surprise me?? It sure beats ol' what's his face...😋
mfbukowski Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 (edited) 15 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said: And what if one goes to priesthood meeting first, before sacrament meeting, and half the men in the elders quorum are Bishop So-and-So? Seriously, this is silly. I think I'm going to start calling all our deacons 'Deacon'. It is, after all, their priesthood office. Does your bishop attend EQ? Does every attendee announce their name? That seems unusual. The bishop attends the opening, yes. But the lesson? But the opening alone should give an indication of a bishopric member at least. I could never find the time, to attend except very rarely Maybe since you are not used to the custom, you are seeing it as harder than it is in practice. Edited December 22, 2018 by mfbukowski
JAHS Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 48 minutes ago, strappinglad said: A friend of mine has the last name " Elder ". On his mission he was Elder Elder. At home he was Brother Elder , then brother Jim. At one calling he was President Elder. Things can get strange. I had a Bishop in one of my wards whose last name was Bishop........Bishop Bishop
Rain Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 (edited) I've talked about it before and searched for it then, but I can remember, either in a letter or in CHI, where it stated not to call him "bishop" anymore. I wish I could find that and share it. I have found people mentioning they have seen it as well. Personally I like the idea of going to whatever the person likes. I hate being called "Sister Patty". I prefer being called "Patty", but if you must call me "Sister" then use my last name as well. Edited December 22, 2018 by Rain 1
Rain Posted December 22, 2018 Posted December 22, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Jeanne said: Well...I kind of like that...she deserves just as much respect as a Bishop. I personally feel that everyone who magnifies their calling deserves the same respect as a bishop, apostle etc. We always say it doesn't matter what calling you have, that it only matters how you fill that calling. If that were true in everyones' minds then family members would show up when primary teachers were sustained or for no calling, everyone would be called by a title related to their calling or no one would and no one would congratulate someone for receiving a new calling. I think it would be great when the next time we got a new bishop, if DH were called as primary teacher and it happened to be a week when my parents were in town. Edited December 22, 2018 by Rain 3
Scott Lloyd Posted December 23, 2018 Posted December 23, 2018 13 hours ago, Bob Crockett said: As it is not covered in any priesthood manual it is just a cultural thing. There's a guy in our ward who was a bishop three times when he lived in the Philippines. He moved to our ward and is a humble guy. Both he and his wife are CPAs. Nobody refers to him as "bishop." We should resist the impulse. I always try and correct members when they call me by my prior church office except, perhaps, the wife of a much higher-ranking church authority. If it’s a cultural thing, it is pervasive enough and longlasting enough that it seems the Brethren could have put a stop to it by now if they were so inclined. Some “cultural things” are scarcely worth fussing over.
Scott Lloyd Posted December 23, 2018 Posted December 23, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, Rain said: I've talked about it before and searched for it then, but I can remember, either in a letter or in CHI, where it stated not to call him "bishop" anymore. I wish I could find that and share it. I have found people mentioning they have seen it as well. If you can document it, please do, because I would earnestly like to know if that is the case. As I said, I’ve seen it done in the Church throughout my life, and this is honestly the first hint I’ve ever seen that it was frowned upon. Even today in my ward, visiting high council speakers are occasionally introduced as “Bishop” so-and-so in reference to their previous Church calling and standing priesthood office. Edited December 23, 2018 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted December 23, 2018 Posted December 23, 2018 6 hours ago, Rain said: I've talked about it before and searched for it then, but I can remember, either in a letter or in CHI, where it stated not to call him "bishop" anymore. I wish I could find that and share it. I have found people mentioning they have seen it as well. If you can document it, please do, because I would earnestly like to know if that is the case. As I said, I’ve seen it done in the Church throughout my life, and this is honestly the first hint I’ve ever seen that it was frowned upon. Edited to add: I found this link on LDS.org. It is old, but it does seem to indicate there is nothing wrong with the practice: https://www.lds.org/new-era/1980/06/q-and-a-questions-and-answers/do-you-refer-to-a-former-bishop-as-brother-or-as-bishop?lang=eng
JAHS Posted December 23, 2018 Posted December 23, 2018 35 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: If you can document it, please do, because I would earnestly like to know if that is the case. As I said, I’ve seen it done in the Church throughout my life, and this is honestly the first hint I’ve ever seen that it was frowned upon. Edited to add: I found this link on LDS.org. It is old, but it does seem to indicate there is nothing wrong with the practice: https://www.lds.org/new-era/1980/06/q-and-a-questions-and-answers/do-you-refer-to-a-former-bishop-as-brother-or-as-bishop?lang=eng Gee. Wish I posted that. 😉
Recommended Posts