JamesBYoung Posted March 27, 2020 Posted March 27, 2020 The Bishop's store house is similar to a people's food pantry. Have good hygienic practices and curb side service.
Bernard Gui Posted March 27, 2020 Posted March 27, 2020 (edited) On 3/26/2020 at 1:34 PM, Amulek said: Well sure, if they are licking the avocados before placing them in your bag then that should probably stop. But I don't think there's anything inherently shocking / surprising / controversial about a food shelter like the bishop's storehouse remaining open - especially when other, similar essential businesses remain open (not to mention all the questionably essential ones). The OP seemed scandalized that the bishop's storehouse even open at all. Not that they were open and not following CDC guidelines (or whatever the Canadian equivalent may be) or open in spite of some specific, particularized risk. Just that they were open - period. That just seems a little overwrought to me. Quote JamesBYoung said: The Bishop's store house is similar to a people's food pantry. Have good hygienic practices and curb side service. As a person over 70, I'm paying close attention to the warnings and advice about not being exposed to someone with the virus when handling food items from stores. That seems prudent to me at this time. I sincerely hope they are following legitimate safety protocols. Edited April 2, 2020 by Bernard Gui
Bernard Gui Posted March 27, 2020 Posted March 27, 2020 (edited) Given the current situation, what would you think of a bunch of Saints getting in their cars and parading through the neighborhood of a recently returned missionary while waving signs, honking horns, and yelling out the windows of the cars as they pass his house ....as kind of a "welcome home" effort.....but still "maintaining personal distances"......in the face of a "stay at home, don't travel, except for food or medical purposes" from the governor..........? Edited March 27, 2020 by Bernard Gui 1
Ahab Posted March 27, 2020 Posted March 27, 2020 On 3/25/2020 at 9:42 AM, provoman said: *The information provided in this post is taken from another website. The purported source poster claims to have received the information from a sister in Eastmark Stake of Mesa Arizona. Reportedly a flyer is being sent out in an Mesa Arizona ward/stake inviting people to meet in a public park for Sunday school to to study. To my knowledge Arizona is not under restrictions regarding gatherings - Maricopa County does have over 400 case of covid19. There is this from the Church newsroom: The flyer references Elder Quentin L. Cook Oct 2018 "gather in groups outside the normal Sunday worship services to enjoy gospel sociality and be strengthened by studying". Just more evidence that members of the Church are not perfect and that we need to keep trying to worship/emulate/trying to become like people who are totally perfect in every way possible.
The Nehor Posted March 27, 2020 Posted March 27, 2020 It is the natural tendency of people under any kind of restriction to stick to the letter of it while ignoring the spirit of it. I still think of that boneheaded Stake that thought they would hold a mass sacrament blessing and then have the Aaronic Presthood hand deliver to everyone in the stake while failing to realize why we were told not to have meetings at all. 2
2BizE Posted March 28, 2020 Posted March 28, 2020 On 3/25/2020 at 11:10 AM, DispensatorMysteriorum said: The local priesthood leaders ought to shut this down, IMO. I don’t like this from a public health perspective, but the church tries to control every aspect of life, and when it doesn’t some people still think it should.
Kenngo1969 Posted March 28, 2020 Posted March 28, 2020 11 minutes ago, 2BizE said: I don’t like this from a public health perspective, but the church tries to control every aspect of life, and when it doesn’t some people still think it should. Should I bother asking you to explain yourself here? Generally, the approach of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its leaders is, "If you do [x], you will be blessed," or, "If you do not do [x], the law of the harvest dictates that you cannot be blessed," or, "If you do [not-x], or if you do [y] the law of the harvest dictates that you cannot be blessed to the degree that you would be if you did the opposite." People are free to accept or to reject such proclamations as they will. If one doesn't believe that one will be blessed for doing [x], or that blessings will be withheld if he does not do [x] or if he does [not-x], or if he does [y] instead of [x], I don't see how that's "controlling every aspect of life." . https://greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2013/06/08/on-submitting-my-will-to-gods/ 1
Scott Lloyd Posted March 28, 2020 Posted March 28, 2020 On 3/25/2020 at 11:09 PM, Calm said: We are neck and neck with rep points, cinepro (10 each)...I thought you were going to surge ahead being the funny one...while mine is just succinctly profound, but Scott Lloyd brought me back to one short and then Duncan just pulled me back into the race. The suspense on who is going to win is killing me... What are you talking about? You have over 35,500 rep points.
Rain Posted March 28, 2020 Posted March 28, 2020 1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said: What are you talking about? You have over 35,500 rep points. The 2 posts on this thread by the 2 of them that each had 10 rep points at the time.
Calm Posted March 28, 2020 Posted March 28, 2020 (edited) We are both at 13 now, lol. It was just an odd site to see, two short enough posts that I can see them both at the same time...both getting the five pointer mark about the same time and then getting quite a few additional rep points. It felt like I was watching a cockroach race or something. here is a link to cinepro's as he put much more effort into his than mine and it a much more fun read, so more enjoyable reread. https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/72749-what-am-i-not-understanding-members-holding-public-gospel-study-sessions/?do=findComment&comment=1209965694 When there isn't much to read, I check my rep points because some people don't post much, but I feel like they are saying "hi" with reps plus I am interested in what others find interesting. Edited March 28, 2020 by Calm
Stargazer Posted March 30, 2020 Posted March 30, 2020 On 3/26/2020 at 2:32 AM, provoman said: The Constitution basis of such authority? There might not be one, but President Jefferson once wrote: "A strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means." Take it as you will.
Scott Lloyd Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 (edited) On 3/27/2020 at 12:41 PM, The Nehor said: It is the natural tendency of people under any kind of restriction to stick to the letter of it while ignoring the spirit of it. I still think of that boneheaded Stake that thought they would hold a mass sacrament blessing and then have the Aaronic Presthood hand deliver to everyone in the stake while failing to realize why we were told not to have meetings at all. How fortunate that the cooler heads prevailed over the bone heads in that stake. I marvel that such a thing was considered for even half a second. Did it really happen? Sound bizarre enough to be an urban legend. Edited April 2, 2020 by Scott Lloyd
The Nehor Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 45 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: How fortunate that the cooler heads prevailed over the bone heads in that stake. I marvel that such a thing was considered for even half a second. Did it really happen? Sound bizarre enough to be an urban legend. Pretty sure it did. I got it from one of the bishops who shot it down and I have never known him to go that far in hyperbole. It was just the Stake Presidency though at that point. My understanding is the High Council was equally confused about the whole thing and thought it was crazy when they heard. To be fair the leadership changed course quickly when the flaws were pointed out.
Scott Lloyd Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, The Nehor said: Pretty sure it did. I got it from one of the bishops who shot it down and I have never known him to go that far in hyperbole. It was just the Stake Presidency though at that point. My understanding is the High Council was equally confused about the whole thing and thought it was crazy when they heard. To be fair the leadership changed course quickly when the flaws were pointed out. I suppose it goes to show there is strength in councils. Apart from being foolhardy and logistically daunting, it would have been entirely unnecessary with the bulk of the households in the stake Each having priesthood authority in residence. All you have to do is turn the key and let the fathers and sons exercise their priesthood power while they shelter in place. Edited April 2, 2020 by Scott Lloyd
Thinking Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 Quote We will also have a guitar player that will lead us in singing church and primary hymns. 'Nuff said.
The Nehor Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 On 3/27/2020 at 1:36 PM, Ahab said: Just more evidence that members of the Church are not perfect and that we need to keep trying to worship/emulate/trying to become like people who are totally perfect in every way possible. With anyone else I would take that last bit with a dose of irony. As it is you......not sure.
The Nehor Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 9 minutes ago, Thinking said: 'Nuff said. Indeed, they are all going to hell.
HappyJackWagon Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 On 3/25/2020 at 4:14 PM, rongo said: These types of things are a seedbed for apostasy and cult followings (charismatic "civilians" leading study groups). They undercut the private, family study or at most study among people close to each other (relationship-wise, not geographically) that many will benefit from during this time. Elder Cook's comments, I'm certain, were more geared towards people close to and close with each other, and not "Denver Snuffer-lite" in the park with lots of people who don't know each other, but directed by the aspiring person putting it on. Danger, Will Robinson! I agree that local leaders should stamp this out. While I agree that the people attending these extra gatherings to discuss gospel topics, it isn't an official church meeting so I don't know why a priesthood leader would have any kind of authority to put a stop to a non-church meeting. Should a priesthood leader ever be able to tell us who we should or shouldn't meet with? I don't think so. That's outside their stewardship. So while these people are being extremely foolish and putting themselves and others at risk, it would seem more appropriate to have a government official or law enforcement get involved instead of a priesthood leader.
poptart Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 On 3/25/2020 at 8:34 PM, provoman said: Just because a government body acts, does not mean their actions are legal. What happens if/when martial law is declared in some places and they have boots on the ground? Have a few buddies who are about to get their marching orders, this could get interesting. Kentucky is doing stuff like this now. https://www.ibtimes.com/covid-19-kentucky-update-judges-order-ankle-monitor-coronavirus-patients-refusing-2950981 People can attempt to sue all they like, wining against the gov't is tricky. I'd think in a situation like this it would be even tougher. Guess we'll see.
Calm Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 7 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: While I agree that the people attending these extra gatherings to discuss gospel topics, it isn't an official church meeting so I don't know why a priesthood leader would have any kind of authority to put a stop to a non-church meeting. Should a priesthood leader ever be able to tell us who we should or shouldn't meet with? I don't think so. That's outside their stewardship. So while these people are being extremely foolish and putting themselves and others at risk, it would seem more appropriate to have a government official or law enforcement get involved instead of a priesthood leader. If they are using church directories or info pages to advertise (I don't know if they are in the specific case), seems appropriate for a church leader, male or female, to point out the inappropriateness of using such.
rongo Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 20 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: While I agree that the people attending these extra gatherings to discuss gospel topics, it isn't an official church meeting so I don't know why a priesthood leader would have any kind of authority to put a stop to a non-church meeting. Should a priesthood leader ever be able to tell us who we should or shouldn't meet with? I don't think so. That's outside their stewardship. So while these people are being extremely foolish and putting themselves and others at risk, it would seem more appropriate to have a government official or law enforcement get involved instead of a priesthood leader. 1) I was addressing this from a priesthood authority perspective, not a public health one. 2) On its face, I agree with you that priesthood leaders shouldn't be able to tell us whom we should or shouldn't meet with. Overall, in general, in broad strokes. 3) The advertised, leafletted, and organized "Sunday School in the park" thing becomes kind of a quasi-official church meeting, precisely because it was advertised, leafletted, and organized. This makes it different from meeting friends and acquaintances in our homes on our own, and makes it church leaders' "business." In my view, this is where the Church's interest in not countenancing apostasy and in discouraging such meetings comes into play. It is within their stewardship because people are seeking to organize and advertise large-scale studies that are broader than one's personal circle of friends and family. 1
HappyJackWagon Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 38 minutes ago, rongo said: 1) I was addressing this from a priesthood authority perspective, not a public health one. 2) On its face, I agree with you that priesthood leaders shouldn't be able to tell us whom we should or shouldn't meet with. Overall, in general, in broad strokes. 3) The advertised, leafletted, and organized "Sunday School in the park" thing becomes kind of a quasi-official church meeting, precisely because it was advertised, leafletted, and organized. This makes it different from meeting friends and acquaintances in our homes on our own, and makes it church leaders' "business." In my view, this is where the Church's interest in not countenancing apostasy and in discouraging such meetings comes into play. It is within their stewardship because people are seeking to organize and advertise large-scale studies that are broader than one's personal circle of friends and family. I'm not sure I understand. If I advertise, organize, and handout invitations to people to meet me at the park for "Sunday school" why does that automatically become the church's interest? "Sunday School" doesn't belong to the church. Now, if it was organized by church leaders, or if the leaflet said it was a meeting of the church that would be a different thing. But if I, Happy Jack Wagon organize a get together at the park to read and study scriptures with friends, my priesthood leader has ZERO right to tell me to stop. He doesn't have authority to control my interactions with others. If my leader learned I was doing this and was concerned, it would make sense for him to reach out and tell me he didn't think it was a good idea. But if he tries to stop the gathering by forbidding me to hold it, or by calling other participants and actively campaigning for them not to participate, I believe that leader would have crossed a line of unrighteous dominion.
MustardSeed Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 On 3/27/2020 at 10:59 AM, Bernard Gui said: Given the current situation, what would you think of a bunch of Saints getting in their cars and parading through the neighborhood of a recently returned missionary while waving signs, honking horns, and yelling out the windows of the cars as they pass his house ....as kind of a "welcome home" effort.....but still "maintaining personal distances"......in the face of a "stay at home, don't travel, except for food or medical purposes" from the governor..........? It’s great. Last week I serenaded a friend for her birthday from the driveway. no ones gonna contract a virus in a drive by.
rongo Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 47 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: I'm not sure I understand. If I advertise, organize, and handout invitations to people to meet me at the park for "Sunday school" why does that automatically become the church's interest? "Sunday School" doesn't belong to the church. Now, if it was organized by church leaders, or if the leaflet said it was a meeting of the church that would be a different thing. But if I, Happy Jack Wagon organize a get together at the park to read and study scriptures with friends, my priesthood leader has ZERO right to tell me to stop. He doesn't have authority to control my interactions with others. If my leader learned I was doing this and was concerned, it would make sense for him to reach out and tell me he didn't think it was a good idea. But if he tries to stop the gathering by forbidding me to hold it, or by calling other participants and actively campaigning for them not to participate, I believe that leader would have crossed a line of unrighteous dominion. If I recall, the leaflet specifically billed it as "Come Follow Me," with the regular schedule of lessons. If the Church curriculum is being publicly taught in a park, and pitched to strangers with an eye to getting a big turnout, I'd say the bishops and stake presidents of that area have an interest in how and what is taught. You're right, leaders don't have "at the end of a gun barrel" authority to try to stop it, but they do have formal discipline authority if members refuse to stop or are recalcitrant about it. It's at least an option available to them. If it's just a private Bible study, I agree with you. If it's styled as Sunday School on the same schedule, with the same curricula, and even the same branding (as this situation is), then obviously I don't agree with you. 2
Bernard Gui Posted April 2, 2020 Posted April 2, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, MustardSeed said: It’s great. Last week I serenaded a friend for her birthday from the driveway. no ones gonna contract a virus in a drive by. But if you have been given a stay at home, do not travel except or food and medical purposes mandate, you feel it's still ok to go out and do this? Was your serenade trip for food or medicine? Edited April 2, 2020 by Bernard Gui
Recommended Posts