High Council qualifications

[mbh26]

Does a man have to be married to serve on the high council?  What about a bishop or his counselors?  

[bluebell]

3 minutes ago, mbh26 said:

Does a man have to be married to serve on the high council?  What about a bishop or his counselors?  

This article is from the 90s but pretty interesting.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1990/10/i-have-a-question/what-callings-are-open-to-single-members-of-the-church?lang=eng

In an average ward, approximately 330 Church callings need to be filled. Generally, all are open to be filled by worthy and faithful single members. With few exceptions, bishops are called from the ranks of the faithful married brethren.

In an average stake, approximately 80 Church callings need to be filled. Generally, most all are open to worthy single members. Tradition and practice suggest, however, that a stake president be married.

On occasion, some stake presidents and bishops, upon becoming widowers, have been released from serving. But others, as with General Authorities who lose their wives, have continued to serve for lengthy periods of time. Whether they continue serving as a bishop or stake president depends on their family responsibilities, time constraints, and the stress they feel as they struggle to adjust to the challenges of being newly single.

Edited June 22, 2022 by bluebell

[InCognitus]

3 minutes ago, mbh26 said:

Does a man have to be married to serve on the high council? 

No.  (I know some).

3 minutes ago, mbh26 said:

What about a bishop

Yes.

3 minutes ago, mbh26 said:

or his counselors?

No.

[bluebell]

5 minutes ago, mbh26 said:

Does a man have to be married to serve on the high council?  What about a bishop or his counselors?  

This came out in 2021 after an update to the Handbook-

“In recent months, our minds have been drawn with particular focus to Latter-day Saints who are single adults,” said Elder Quentin L. Cook. “We want you to know that you are loved—and so very needed in building the kingdom of God. For this reason, we felt to search carefully for policies and misperceptions that might limit the Church service of single members. What we found was that Church policy already allows for broad service by single adults—and it could be even broader. We feel today’s policy adjustments can make a big difference. We hope your leaders know to put you to work—including as counselors in bishoprics, on high councils, and as organization presidents and counselors.”

Single adult males in young single adult or single adult wards may now serve as counselors in both ward and stake presidencies. They may also serve as high councilors in the stake. All men serving in a bishopric, either married or single, must be high priests. The policy states that “if a man called as a counselor in a bishopric is not a high priest, the stake president ensures that he is ordained a high priest before setting him apart.”

[The Nehor]

19 minutes ago, bluebell said:

This came out in 2021 after an update to the Handbook-

“In recent months, our minds have been drawn with particular focus to Latter-day Saints who are single adults,” said Elder Quentin L. Cook. “We want you to know that you are loved—and so very needed in building the kingdom of God. For this reason, we felt to search carefully for policies and misperceptions that might limit the Church service of single members. What we found was that Church policy already allows for broad service by single adults—and it could be even broader. We feel today’s policy adjustments can make a big difference. We hope your leaders know to put you to work—including as counselors in bishoprics, on high councils, and as organization presidents and counselors.”

Single adult males in young single adult or single adult wards may now serve as counselors in both ward and stake presidencies. They may also serve as high councilors in the stake. All men serving in a bishopric, either married or single, must be high priests. The policy states that “if a man called as a counselor in a bishopric is not a high priest, the stake president ensures that he is ordained a high priest before setting him apart.”

My current Stake Presidency has ridiculous made up rules for lots of callings.

[bluebell]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

My current Stake Presidency has ridiculous made up rules for lots of callings.

Stake Presidents like that can be quite the adventure (in a terrifying way).

[bluebell]

26 minutes ago, Obehave said:

Interesting choice of words.  Why some of us say that, I'm not really sure, but I am sure that if a man and woman have been sealed, then they are still husband and wife, not single.  Maybe those who say single only mean apart from their husband or wife.  

I think most people understand it to mean that they are single in this life.  If we didn't see it that way we wouldn't allow people to remarry after a spouse dies, because that would constitute polygamy, which is prohibited.

[The Nehor]

8 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Stake Presidents like that can be quite the adventure (in a terrifying way).

It is always fun submitting calling requests to the Stake and getting back that the person is not qualified.

“They have to have children now? Le sigh.”

[Calm]

Just now, Obehave said:

when the seal is broken does she become single to marry another man

They not only seal a woman to all her husbands after death, they make exceptions occasionally and allow women to have two sealings when living if her first husband is dead.

[bluebell]

15 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

It is always fun submitting calling requests to the Stake and getting back that the person is not qualified.

“They have to have children now? Le sigh.”

[The Nehor]

6 minutes ago, bluebell said:

That was my response.

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That was my response.

Anyone challenge him on it?  Ask him why he thinks it is needed? 

[bluebell]

19 minutes ago, Obehave said:

Not really single, though.  Both are still married to each other in this life, the only life we have, even though apart from each other, as long as that seal is not broken or loosed.  Men can still marry other women and a woman can break her first sealing to marry another man, if that is her choice, but only when the seal is broken does she become single to marry another man while supposedly the man is also single and will marry another woman.

Anyway, I was just pointing out an interesting choice of words to refer to a married person who is still sealed to his or her spouse.

Uh, no.  A woman can remarry again without breaking her sealing.  She can marry someone without being sealed to them.  I've known many very active women who were widowed and who remarried again without needing to break any sealings.

This is because once a spouse dies, the person is considered by the church (and the world) to be single.

[bluebell]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That was my response.

Someone really needs to call him on that.  Like, ask where it says that is a requirement in the handbook maybe?  Something still respectful but concerned.

[bluebell]

20 minutes ago, Calm said:

They not only seal a woman to all her husbands after death, they make exceptions occasionally and allow women to have two sealings when living if her first husband is dead.

Not to mention, the woman is considered single after the death of her husband whether she has the sealing to her first husband cancelled or not.

[bluebell]

12 minutes ago, Obehave said:

I know and accept that.

I have too.  Not my point.

If a sealing between a husband and wife isn't broken, then technically they are still husband and wife and will be forever.  That is what a sealing means to most members of the Church that I know.  You seem to be an exception.

I still say they are not really single if they are still sealed to each other as husband and wife.

I don't think that I'm the one who has the exceptional idea about whether or not it's appropriate to call widows and widowers "single" in the church.   

[The Nehor]

21 minutes ago, Calm said:

Anyone challenge him on it?  Ask him why he thinks it is needed? 

Yes, his response was along the lines of since he approves the call he can put restrictions in.

18 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Someone really needs to call him on that.  Like, ask where it says that is a requirement in the handbook maybe?  Something still respectful but concerned.

This is one of the more minor problems we have. It is an interesting stake.

[bluebell]

Just now, The Nehor said:

Yes, his response was along the lines of since he approves the call he can put restrictions in.

This is one of the more minor problems we have. It is an interesting stake.

He can change the handbook because he approves the call?  Interesting take on authority.

[rongo]

2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

He can change the handbook because he approves the call?  Interesting take on authority.

It's not changing the handbook to have personal preferences in certain stake callings (like having children, as Nehor said).

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

He can change the handbook because he approves the call?  Interesting take on authority.

Indeed. I can tell you that if I were a Bishop or an Elder's Quorum President in this stake I would quit within a few months at most.

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, rongo said:

It's not changing the handbook to have personal preferences in certain stake callings (like having children, as Nehor said).

These are ward callings that the Stake Presidency gives approval for. They ask for recommendations. We are on the fourth group of names I think.

[rongo]

20 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

These are ward callings that the Stake Presidency gives approval for. They ask for recommendations. We are on the fourth group of names I think.

I misunderstood. So they're micromanaging ward callings (other than EQpresidency)? 

Yeah, that's different. 

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, InCognitus said:

No.  (I know some).

Yes.

No.

Yep.

1 Timothy 3:2-12    And it goes on.

New Testament- so discussions regarding LDS policy become irrelevant.

 

Quote

 

King James Version

² A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

³ Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

⁴ One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

⁵ (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

⁶ Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride.....

 

 

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

This came out in 2021 after an update to the Handbook-

“The policy states that “if a man called as a counselor in a bishopric is not a high priest, the stake president ensures that he is ordained a high priest before setting him apart.”

And nowadays the "High Priest Quorum" only is made up of presently serving leaders, but for those ordained HP's, their quorum status becomes "Elder" when they are released from the position which requires them to be a HP.

Kind of like the 70's thing.

I am an ordained 70 but not in a 70's quorum because I was ordained a 70 in the 1970's before the rules changed.   So I am an ordained bishop AND a 70 though neither of those now apply to my quorum status as an Elder, because I am not presently serving in a calling requiring me to ACT administratively in either of those callings.

Maybe that was said already

[The Nehor]

40 minutes ago, rongo said:

I misunderstood. So they're micromanaging ward callings (other than EQpresidency)? 

Yeah, that's different. 

No, they are micromanaging those ward callings that go through them (including Elder’s Quorum Presidency). It is just one fun thing they are doing.

I could tell dozens of stories of similar joy and happiness but I would probably end up in hell for it.