Hey, remember when I promised to regularly give you new and interesting content? Yeah, me neither.
Anyways, Since conference I've had one topic keep coming up in my poor little brain, so much so that I had one of those weird half awake/half asleep moments where you're kind of dreaming but not really about it. So I'm going to blog about that.
In conference this year we had the sustaining of church officers. Also this year we had what seems to be becoming a tradition; the opposing vote. The person(s) who decided to shout "opposed" when the asked if any opposed.
Now, I'll all for being kind an considerate towards my fellow man, (or maybe I'm a bitter jerk face, but that's a debate for another time) But I would just like to say that this whole movement is wrong. That is to say they are using the opposing vote wrong. Also I think their reasons for opposing are wrong.
How are they mishandling this, you ask? Well let's start with the obvious. So obvious that it can be condensed into a meme.
It may not always be expressly stated, but the appropriate action for an opposing vote is to simply raise you hand. I'll let this one pass, however, due to the size of the conference center.
Instead let's get to the real problem here, that the opposes seem to be opposing as a matter of protest. I'll get to what they're protesting and all that later, but for now let's talk about what the opposing vote is suppose to be for.
As I understand it, signaling that you oppose a sustaining of a Church officer is only to be done if you are privy to some knowledge that would make said officer unworthy to hold that office. For Example: You get home one night to find that you've been burgled. Some bandit broke into you beautiful bungalow and burgled you beloved Babe Ruth bat! Later you visit your best bud, Brother Brown but before you can begin with the banter and brownies you spot your beloved Babe Ruth Bat in Brother brown's ball room! It's clear that you have been burgled by Brother Brown.
From the looks of it, those who are opposing the sustaining in conference have never even met most or even some of the people they are opposing, so how can they say those men are not worthy?
HOWEVER! I want to point out that in their minds this is part of the problem, that they've never met most of these men. On the Any Opposed website (which appears to be made by the people who orchestrate all of this) they state "Layers of bureaucracy keep higher LDS leadership insulated from hearing authentic concerns and feedback of their members. Correspondence and petitions by lay members directed toward the Church’s General Authorities are almost always returned and delegated to local stake presidents and bishops for further handling ..."
This is a very real concern. As the church grows is gets harder and harder for the prophet and apostles to be fully aware of all the unique challenges of the members. This is exactly the problem that Moses while leading the children of Israel through the wilderness. The people continued to come to Moses with their problems and between that and just dealing with the day to day task of keeping everyone organized Moses was wearing a little thin.
But there is a solution found in Numbers 11:16-17, "And the Lord said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tabernacle of the congregation, that they may stand there with thee. And I will come down and talk with thee there: and I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it not thyself alone." The answer is delegation Which is exactly how the church is run in the Latter Days. Frankly speaking it would be impractical for the Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve to deal with every little problem that comes up when they are already swamped just with keeping things up and running. That is why they refer anyone with issues to their local leadership.
That being said, I don't believe that the Brethren are unaware of what problems are facing the average members of the Church. They regularly talk and visit with the average members and get regular reports from local leaders.
In addition as cliche as it sounds the Brethren are not ordained to be your friend. Their job is to see to it that the priesthood, the doctrine and the ordinances are distributed properly. A faithful member should only oppose the Brethren if they are distributing any of those things improperly, For example, if the Brethren decided to only print the scriptures in the Deseret Alphabet. Though the Deseret Alphabet is superior in every way to the clunky old Latin Alphabet having all our holy writ only available in an obscure script would definitely hinder the work.
Now, there are people who are specifically called to be your friend, being your bishop, your EQ/RS President, your Home/Visiting teachers and so on.
So, is short this Any Opposed movement is using the wrong tool to protest a problem that's largely already been dealt with, with out offering any real solutions.
Still, we should try to listen to their concerns. Perhaps there are better ways of keeping the membership cared for and in touch with the Brethren.
Namaste, y'all,
Michael
Anyways, Since conference I've had one topic keep coming up in my poor little brain, so much so that I had one of those weird half awake/half asleep moments where you're kind of dreaming but not really about it. So I'm going to blog about that.
In conference this year we had the sustaining of church officers. Also this year we had what seems to be becoming a tradition; the opposing vote. The person(s) who decided to shout "opposed" when the asked if any opposed.
Now, I'll all for being kind an considerate towards my fellow man, (or maybe I'm a bitter jerk face, but that's a debate for another time) But I would just like to say that this whole movement is wrong. That is to say they are using the opposing vote wrong. Also I think their reasons for opposing are wrong.
How are they mishandling this, you ask? Well let's start with the obvious. So obvious that it can be condensed into a meme.
Instead let's get to the real problem here, that the opposes seem to be opposing as a matter of protest. I'll get to what they're protesting and all that later, but for now let's talk about what the opposing vote is suppose to be for.
As I understand it, signaling that you oppose a sustaining of a Church officer is only to be done if you are privy to some knowledge that would make said officer unworthy to hold that office. For Example: You get home one night to find that you've been burgled. Some bandit broke into you beautiful bungalow and burgled you beloved Babe Ruth bat! Later you visit your best bud, Brother Brown but before you can begin with the banter and brownies you spot your beloved Babe Ruth Bat in Brother brown's ball room! It's clear that you have been burgled by Brother Brown.
Oh, Brother Brown, I guess it's Burglar Brown, now.
Later, Brother Brown is called to be bishop. Being that you are the only one who knows about Brother B-excuse me, BURGLAR Brown's bat burgling, you are then expected to oppose the vote and bring that information to the attention of the appropriate people.From the looks of it, those who are opposing the sustaining in conference have never even met most or even some of the people they are opposing, so how can they say those men are not worthy?
HOWEVER! I want to point out that in their minds this is part of the problem, that they've never met most of these men. On the Any Opposed website (which appears to be made by the people who orchestrate all of this) they state "Layers of bureaucracy keep higher LDS leadership insulated from hearing authentic concerns and feedback of their members. Correspondence and petitions by lay members directed toward the Church’s General Authorities are almost always returned and delegated to local stake presidents and bishops for further handling ..."
This is a very real concern. As the church grows is gets harder and harder for the prophet and apostles to be fully aware of all the unique challenges of the members. This is exactly the problem that Moses while leading the children of Israel through the wilderness. The people continued to come to Moses with their problems and between that and just dealing with the day to day task of keeping everyone organized Moses was wearing a little thin.
But there is a solution found in Numbers 11:16-17, "And the Lord said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tabernacle of the congregation, that they may stand there with thee. And I will come down and talk with thee there: and I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it not thyself alone." The answer is delegation Which is exactly how the church is run in the Latter Days. Frankly speaking it would be impractical for the Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve to deal with every little problem that comes up when they are already swamped just with keeping things up and running. That is why they refer anyone with issues to their local leadership.
That being said, I don't believe that the Brethren are unaware of what problems are facing the average members of the Church. They regularly talk and visit with the average members and get regular reports from local leaders.
In addition as cliche as it sounds the Brethren are not ordained to be your friend. Their job is to see to it that the priesthood, the doctrine and the ordinances are distributed properly. A faithful member should only oppose the Brethren if they are distributing any of those things improperly, For example, if the Brethren decided to only print the scriptures in the Deseret Alphabet. Though the Deseret Alphabet is superior in every way to the clunky old Latin Alphabet having all our holy writ only available in an obscure script would definitely hinder the work.
Now, there are people who are specifically called to be your friend, being your bishop, your EQ/RS President, your Home/Visiting teachers and so on.
So, is short this Any Opposed movement is using the wrong tool to protest a problem that's largely already been dealt with, with out offering any real solutions.
Still, we should try to listen to their concerns. Perhaps there are better ways of keeping the membership cared for and in touch with the Brethren.
Namaste, y'all,
Michael
No comments:
Post a Comment