Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

should incorrect teachings be corrected?


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 kevieb

kevieb

    Member

  • Inactive 1+ year
  • PipPipPip
  • 70 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 06:01 AM

It is 5:30 am---I have been up since about 1:am because i have had something going around and around in my mind. I had a visit with the take president yesterday. The last time we had talked we had discussed children and what the church handbook says they are allowed to do in church. I have struggled ever since moving into this stake because it felt like the children were ostracized at church. They were not allowed to sing for mother's day, father's day, easter, christmas.......nothing except the primary program. they also did not allow any child under 12 to bear their testimony. I didn't know if it was our bishop or our stake---and then someone told me this came from the first presidency. I have worked in primary since i was in high school, and before the block program. I used to play the piano for primary after school when I was still in high school. I have spent much of my adult life working in music---more often than not, I have worked with the primary children. I was so bothered by how different the church seemed in my new ward and stake, that I looked up the church handbook to see what it actually said---and it said that children's choir's and family choirs could sing for church meetings. As far as I could tell, it was only our stake that was treating the children this way---i heard a few theories about how this came about--and i wondered why no one ever questioned them. We eventually had a primary president and a new bishop that somehow managed to allow our children to sing for mother's day. To make a long story short, we are 3 years with a new stake president and the new handbook specified that children could bear their testimonies as long as they could do it by themselves. I was discussing this with the stake president, and I told him that the handbook had always said the same thing about children and music. He said I had given him a challenge, and that he was going to look it up, because he had to teach the stake about the handbook. he said something about the handbook saying children under 12 were not to participate in sacrament meeting except for the primary program. (My own assumption is that i must have meant giving talks) I think I asked him if he had looked up music specifically. I asked him yesterday what he had learned when he researched about children and sacrament meeting participation. He told me that I had been right and that he had apologized to the people he was teaching on the stake level because they had been teaching them wrong---but he said they weren't going to advertise it. He did tell me that his son had lived in my ward and had said it was weird that the primary children did not sing for mother's or father's day----seems that apparently our ward was far more strict about what they misunderstood---the stake president even suggested that it might just be our ward. I am wondering why our local leaders would not want to correct something they had been teaching people, once they discovered that they had been teaching them incorrectly. I realize that a lot of people would see this as no big deal----but it has really bothered me, probably because I have had so many children of my own, and I have worked in primary music so much---both leading and playing the piano. I realize that this is not a Major doctrinal issue---but we are supposed to learn line upon line, precept on precept. The huge differences I saw in the church after moving to a different stake have really shaken my testimony up and it is still rattling around a bit. I feel like I am back to line upon line, precept on precept and I am struggling with knowing that what i believed was right all along, but had been mis-understood for whatever reason by our stake leaders---and now that they realize their mistake, they don't feel the need to get the word out to people so that they understand correctly what the church actually teaches. I always kind of felt that if Christ were to show up at church---the first group he would want to visit would be the primary children.

#2 Eowyn

Eowyn

    Senior Moderator

  • Senior Moderators
  • 6350 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 07:40 AM

I think you spend a lot of time thinking of everything your leaders are doing wrong in your eyes. Maybe you ought to think about why that might be.

"Therefore, let us beware of false prophets and false teachers, both men and women, who are self-appointed declarers of the doctrines of the Church and who seek to spread their false gospel and attract followers by sponsoring symposia, books, and journals whose contents challenge fundamental doctrines of the Church. Beware of those who speak and publish in opposition to God’s true prophets and who actively proselyte others with reckless disregard for the eternal well-being of those whom they seduce. Like Nehor and Korihor in the Book of Mormon, they rely on sophistry to deceive and entice others to their views. They “set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the world; but they seek not the welfare of Zion” (2 Ne. 26:29). (Beware of False Prophets and Teachers, supra.)

Elder M Russell Ballard


#3 NeuroTypical

NeuroTypical

    Senior Moderator

  • Senior Moderators
  • 7423 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 08:15 AM

He told me that I had been right and that he had apologized to the people he was teaching on the stake level because they had been teaching them wrong---but he said they weren't going to advertise it.
...
I am wondering why our local leaders would not want to correct something they had been teaching people, once they discovered that they had been teaching them incorrectly.

Wait - didn't you just say he had apologized to the people he was teaching? Did he not say why he was apologizing?

I assume you're asking for something like a statement from the podium in sacrament meeting or something?

"Dear brothers and sisters, the stake presidency needs to come clean about something. We've been handling children's musical numbers wrong for years, and it wasn't until a good stalwart member showed us the error of our ways that we realized. Sister kevieb, thank you for pointing this out."

Something like that?

The huge differences I saw in the church after moving to a different stake have really shaken my testimony up and it is still rattling around a bit.

Wait - I'm confused. How a stake handles a children's choir has damaged your testimony of the reality and divinity of Jesus Christ?

What am I missing here?
If I were rich, I'd have the time that I lack, to sit in the synagogue and pray.
And maybe have a seat by the Eastern wall.
And I'd discuss the holy books with the learned men, several hours every day.
That would be the sweetest thing of all.

Ohhh....
If I were a rich man...

#4 kevieb

kevieb

    Member

  • Inactive 1+ year
  • PipPipPip
  • 70 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 08:33 AM

I am seeking to know the truth and am battling with within myself to keep the negative at bay. I feel like I am a bit behind in the fight, but I hope to come out ahead in the end. I have had some good discussions with my stake president, and he was the one who saw my question as a challenge for him. He wanted to look it up---especially since he was going to be teaching on the very thing I was wondering about. This was not a matter of whether or not I thought something was wrong in MY eyes---the stake president himself told me they had been teaching it wrong----I appreciate the fact that he could be so honest with me and tell me that I had been right and that he had apologized to the stake people he was teaching. What I see is that there is the potential for an entire stake to have an incorrect belief because we are taught to follow what our leaders teachings. I can't understand why they would not want to correct something they know has been taught wrong. The title of my thread was, "should incorrect teachings be corrected?" And the answer to that question is what I am seeking---not a judgement of what someone "thinks" I may or may not be spending my time thinking about. Please don't assume something about me because I am trying to figure out what is right and what is wrong. I only asked my stake president what he had learned when he had studied up on what we had talked about previously---he was the one who said they had been wrong.

#5 Jenamarie

Jenamarie

    I am glad for many things.

  • Members
  • 2245 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:01 AM

When I think of "incorrect teachings that need to be corrected" I think of things that are of more doctrinal importance than whether or not children get to sing to their parents in Sacrament meeting on Mother's and Father's Day. The CHI is a handbook, not Scripture. No great harm is done to teaching correct belief in Christ, IMO, by not having the children sing in Sacrament on those days. It's a tradition, not a Doctrine. If the SP was teaching people that we ought to completely disregard the Bible in favor of the Book of Mormon, or that polygamy is something that is okay to still practice today, THEN I'd be all in favor of making a big deal out of it.
And I will bring the blind by a way that they knew not; I will lead them in paths that they have not known: I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things will I do unto them, and not forsake them.
Isaiah 42:16

#6 Anddenex

Anddenex

    Intelligence

  • Members
  • 2833 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:04 AM

Yes, incorrect teachings should always be corrected.

In light of this, however, we also need to recognize the difference between incorrect teachings and personal application of doctrines, or handbook guidelines.

Although, we may not agree, if the Bishop or Stake President only want children to sing at the Primary program, then that is their choice.

There is nothing in the handbook that specifies children must sing at Mother's day, Father's day, etc... This is more the culture we have become used to. This is personal application versus following correct guidelines.

#7 estradling75

estradling75

    The Grumpy Moderator

  • Administrators
  • 4240 posts
  • LocationOut of my Mind

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:06 AM

It seems that you have a particular idea (or maybe demand) on how the Stake President should be correcting his mistake. There are lots of teachings in the church not all of them are of eternal impact. The only eternal impact I am seeing in this one is on how you are responding to your Stake President. Your Stake President thought he was following the handbook. You triggered an event that caused him to re-evalutate what he thought he knew. Which is good. Now he knows. However he is the local leader and he is given the power/responsibility to adapt the program to what he thinks will work best for his Stake. Which would include altering or ignoring the handbook if he feels it is truly necessary. So while citing the handbook as a reason for his policies was in error it doesn't mean he can't have such polices if he feels they are in the best interest of his Stake. Even if he is convinced that he was wrong, and that he needs to take a 180 turn on this issue. Then chances are he is going to want to talk to his councilors, the high council, and his bishops and get them on board and explain the changes to them before rolling it out. And that kind of stuff takes time.

I had a life once... now I have a computer and a modem.

Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply. Stephen R Covey


#8 anatess

anatess

    Resident Alien

  • Members
  • 10640 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:10 AM

I am seeking to know the truth and am battling with within myself to keep the negative at bay. I feel like I am a bit behind in the fight, but I hope to come out ahead in the end.

I have had some good discussions with my stake president, and he was the one who saw my question as a challenge for him. He wanted to look it up---especially since he was going to be teaching on the very thing I was wondering about.

This was not a matter of whether or not I thought something was wrong in MY eyes---the stake president himself told me they had been teaching it wrong----I appreciate the fact that he could be so honest with me and tell me that I had been right and that he had apologized to the stake people he was teaching.

What I see is that there is the potential for an entire stake to have an incorrect belief because we are taught to follow what our leaders teachings. I can't understand why they would not want to correct something they know has been taught wrong.

The title of my thread was, "should incorrect teachings be corrected?" And the answer to that question is what I am seeking---not a judgement of what someone "thinks" I may or may not be spending my time thinking about. Please don't assume something about me because I am trying to figure out what is right and what is wrong.

I only asked my stake president what he had learned when he had studied up on what we had talked about previously---he was the one who said they had been wrong.


Keveib, these two statements are contradictory:

"I appreciate the fact that he could be so honest with me and tell me that I had been right and that he had apologized to the stake people he was teaching."

"I can't understand why they would not want to correct something they know has been taught wrong."


This is not a case where the Stake President did not want to correct something because clearly, he already did by apologizing to those he was teaching. This is a matter of expectations - you expected the Stake President to correct the situation according to YOUR method of correction which did not match the Stake President's method of correction.

Personal revelation is one of the most important doctrines in the Church. Church leadership are sustained by its membership through personal revelation. We are not supposed to just follow blindly. At the same time, there is stewardship - the boundaries of your personal revelation. Personal revelation only has authority over your sphere of influence - that is, you, your spouse, and your children. But, when it does not match the teachings of those with broader stewardship, like church leaders, then what you did - going to church leadership to discuss the matter - is the proper way to handle the situation.

Just because Church Leadership are given stewardship over a broad area does not mean they automatically become perfect. They are still subject to human failure just like anybody else. This includes the Prophet himself.

Whether Primary sings in sacrament or not, or whether children under 12 can bear their testimony on the podium or not, is just not that important in the Plan of Salvation. There are so many opportunities for children to bear their testimonies - at Primary, at home, with friends, etc. - that Fast Sunday can be given to the adults who do not have parents that can guide them with their testimonies. In our ward, Primary and Relief Society both have testimony time on Fast Sundays. This gives women and children the opportunity to bear their testimony if they did not get a chance at sacrament meeting. Primary children sing every single Sunday during Singing Time. Singing on Mother's and Father's Day is awesome (we do it in our ward) but this is hardly a faith-shaking event if they don't get to do it (like the past 2 years we didn't get to sing on Father's Day because I had to take a month off from my calling as Primary Music Leader in June to care for my dad).

My advice to you is to cling to what is really important in the Plan of Salvation. Don't let things that are not that big a deal in the whole scheme of things that the adversary can easily throw at you to shake your faith. Look at your church leadership with love and compassion as they are also in the same boat as you - finding their way back to Heavenly Father (trying to overcome pride, trying to overcome fear, trying to overcome hardship, etc.), with the burden of having to be responsible for the welfare of a whole bunch of people in addition to their own families.

#9 Traveler

Traveler

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8964 posts
  • LocationSandy Utah

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:27 AM

The question of correcting incorrect teachings is like asking if we should ever tell a lie. If a husband is asked by his wife if a new dress makes her look skinny – should he be honest and say it make her look fat – if that is what he is really thinking? It seems to me that the role of children at church has more to do with “policy”, culture and tradition than it has to do with doctrine. One of the strange things I discovered raising my own children is that as parents it is more important to communicate that you love your children than it is to convince them that you are always right but there are times that you have to stand up and demonstrate “tuff” love. I guess it is kind of like defensive driving – you can be dead right concerning your right of way in a particular circumstance – but being right is a small thing to cheer about if someone you love is killed in an accident that could have easily been avoided by letting the other person have the right of way that lawfully belonged to you. The Traveler

#10 NeuroTypical

NeuroTypical

    Senior Moderator

  • Senior Moderators
  • 7423 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:28 AM

Whether the primary children can sing in sacrament meeting or not isn't a 'teaching'. It's a policy, a practice, a preference. Put into place by humans doing their best - not breathed into scripture by the mouthpiece of God. This is an important distinction, because if you don't understand it, well, your testimony might be based on the words and actions of men instead of the reality and divinity of Jesus Christ.

And men are error-prone, fallen, agenda-driven, and sometimes goofy. Professor Daniel Peterson tells a story about how he was once asked to participate in revising the Gospel Principles manual, and decided to play a practical joke:

Peterson, "I was doing the passage in Acts where you have Uticus up in the rafters at Troas. Paul drones on and on so long that he falls asleep, and falls out of the rafters. He’s taken up dead it says and Paul has to restore him to life. So I thought, “Alright, have a class member read Acts–whatever the passage is. Now, have you ever killed anyone with a Sacrament Meeting speech? How did it make you feel? What steps could you take in the future to avoid this?” The funny thing is that it passed Correlation."

Wotherspoon, “That part did?” [chuckling]

Peterson, “It did, I can only assume that people chuckled at every point and it made it. When I saw the final draft, final gallies, it was still there!”

Wotherspoon, “No way! Wow.”

Peterson, “I went through a real crisis of conscience there. I thought, ‘I would love to see this go into the manual! But I finally called them and said, “I’m not sure that you’d want that particular bundle of questions there.’ [and they said] ‘Oh good grief! good grief! We’ll take it out! We’ll take it out!’ And I thought ‘it would have been great to see that in Tagalog, Chinese, German, and Spanish all around the world.”


If I were rich, I'd have the time that I lack, to sit in the synagogue and pray.
And maybe have a seat by the Eastern wall.
And I'd discuss the holy books with the learned men, several hours every day.
That would be the sweetest thing of all.

Ohhh....
If I were a rich man...

#11 Eowyn

Eowyn

    Senior Moderator

  • Senior Moderators
  • 6350 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:16 AM

It's just evident to me that most of your contributions since registering here are some kind of nit-picking at your local leadership. That's what I encouraged you to do some introspection about.

"Therefore, let us beware of false prophets and false teachers, both men and women, who are self-appointed declarers of the doctrines of the Church and who seek to spread their false gospel and attract followers by sponsoring symposia, books, and journals whose contents challenge fundamental doctrines of the Church. Beware of those who speak and publish in opposition to God’s true prophets and who actively proselyte others with reckless disregard for the eternal well-being of those whom they seduce. Like Nehor and Korihor in the Book of Mormon, they rely on sophistry to deceive and entice others to their views. They “set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the world; but they seek not the welfare of Zion” (2 Ne. 26:29). (Beware of False Prophets and Teachers, supra.)

Elder M Russell Ballard


#12 pam

pam

    Keep your hands off my gumdrops.

  • Administrators
  • 51713 posts
  • LocationUtah

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:19 AM

I
I only asked my stake president what he had learned when he had studied up on what we had talked about previously---he was the one who said they had been wrong.


That's great that your stake president learned something new. There is so much for Bishops and Stake Presidents to learn when they are called to these positions. Being called doesn't mean they automatically know every little policy and procedure. That's why they have handbooks.

I think you need to let them move forward now. I may not agree with the way some things are handled but I did raise my hand to sustain my leaders when they were called to their position and I think that's where you need to get yourself to. Unless of course they are doctrinally incorrect. This situation isn't really a teaching. When I think of teaching I think of what I'm being taught at church. Not policy and procedure.

I realize that you would like to vent a little. But may I remind everyone about the very first rule in our site rules.

1. Do not post, upload, or otherwise submit anything to the site that is derogatory towards The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, its teachings, or its leaders. Anti-LDS Propaganda will not be tolerated anywhere.

Edited by pam, 07 January 2013 - 10:50 AM.


#13 kevieb

kevieb

    Member

  • Inactive 1+ year
  • PipPipPip
  • 70 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:23 AM

Jenamarie--thank you for giving me your honest opinion without sarcasm and without making fun of me because I am struggling to get my bearings back and get my feet back under me. It wasn't just a matter of not allowing the children to sing on mothers and fathers days---which is just a tradition, like you said. In our stake children were not allowed to bear their testimonies if they were under 12 years old, nor were they allowed to participate in a musical number with their family if they were under 12. I know that the lady in charge of musical numbers has such a hard time getting people to do anything, consequently, we end up hearing from the same few people over and over---or we hear from people outside of our ward. They have such a wonderful resource in the primary to have a few children sing, or just a class sing----I can certainly see that having the whole primary sing on a regular basis could be difficult---but my sister-in-law has told me that in her ward they are constantly asking the primary to sing. I don't think there needs to be a big deal made out of it---but I just kind of thought that people might like to know that it is alright to let their children bear their testimony, if their child can do it alone. I don't think that a lot of people realize it. They were never told from the pulpit, as far as I know, that the children were not allowed to bear their testimonies---I think it was just told to the adults in their meetings-----I would think that they could handle correcting the misconception in the same way---by just letting the adults know that the new handbook states very specifically that children may bear their testimonies if they can do it by themselves--however--they are still encouraged to practice in primary and at home until they can do it correctly and without help. Loudmouth---you ask what you are missing here---compassion, consideration, kindness--are a few things that come to mind. I've seen that a number of people on this board have a tendency to attack people when they come on with a sincere question about something that is bothering them or something that they are wondering about. If it weren't for some of the people on this board who answer questions sincerely, realizing that everyone is at a different level of growth--and some of us slip at times---I would have left this board after the first question I asked. Are you trying to help people, or are you trying to humiliate them? And, you said you ASSUMED that I wanted a statement from the podium or something------I was always taught that when you ASSUME all you do is make an A** out of U and ME. Does it make you feel good to have humiliated me on a public forum? do you feel that you have accomplished your job as a Latter-Day-Saint in helping me to understand things better? Do you feel like you have helped to bring me closer to the Lord and helped me to strengthen my testimony by answering me with sarcasm and making fun of me because I didn't mention everything that I am struggling with? Do you feel like your reply is the reply of a good and kind Latter-Day-Saint? If your answer to all those questions is yes---then either you or I do not belong to the same church. I realize that I have struggled with changes and with some of the things that have been said or done by my leaders--not ALL of my leaders---but then, I haven't told you everything that has been said or done since we have lived in a new stake and a new ward----but, I can tell you that I would never ridicule someone who was struggling and had questions. So.......where's the greater sin---questioning things you don't understand and that don't seem right, because you really are trying to get back on the right path---or ridiculing and making fun of the person that asks?

#14 anatess

anatess

    Resident Alien

  • Members
  • 10640 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:31 AM

Okay, let's all take a deep breath. Nobody is attacking anybody here. This is the internet. People are more inclined to just write it as it is without the patting of the back and saying, "There, there..." prerequisite. Usually, when we read these comments from random people who don't know all the ins and outs of what we're going through, we just try to pick out the parts that are relevant to our situation, learn from it, and just ignore the rest. We kinda have to put on a thicker skin than we normally would have in person... that's just the nature of these type of things when we send a "Dear Abby" letter and there are a jillion Abby's who respond with different personalities, none of which are experts in public communication.

#15 pam

pam

    Keep your hands off my gumdrops.

  • Administrators
  • 51713 posts
  • LocationUtah

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:36 AM

Okay, let's all take a deep breath.

Nobody is attacking anybody here. This is the internet. People are more inclined to just write it as it is without the patting of the back and saying, "There, there..." prerequisite.

Usually, when we read these comments from random people who don't know all the ins and outs of what we're going through, we just try to pick out the parts that are relevant to our situation, learn from it, and just ignore the rest.

We kinda have to put on a thicker skin than we normally would have in person... that's just the nature of these type of things when we send a "Dear Abby" letter and there are a jillion Abby's who respond with different personalities, none of which are experts in public communication.


I agree with this. Also when we are soliciting responses from random people on the internet, we have to expect that responses would be coming from a wide variety of personalities, interests, knowledge and experiences. We may not like all of the responses we receive..but you're going to get them when a question is asked.

#16 Jenamarie

Jenamarie

    I am glad for many things.

  • Members
  • 2245 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:37 AM

Are there wards who have lots of musical numbers? Typically the special Primary numbers (Mother's Day, Father's Day, Easter, Christmas, and the Primary Program), and maybe 1 or two ward choir performances (Easter and Christmas) are all we get in my ward.
And I will bring the blind by a way that they knew not; I will lead them in paths that they have not known: I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things will I do unto them, and not forsake them.
Isaiah 42:16

#17 anatess

anatess

    Resident Alien

  • Members
  • 10640 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:49 AM

Are there wards who have lots of musical numbers? Typically the special Primary numbers (Mother's Day, Father's Day, Easter, Christmas, and the Primary Program), and maybe 1 or two ward choir performances (Easter and Christmas) are all we get in my ward.


Depends on the ward. I've been to wards where Primary Program and Christmas were the only ones. And I've been to wards where the Primary sings every other month. I'm the Primary Music Leader and I tell you, it's big work to have to figure out how to work in practices for Easter/Mother's Day/Father's Day in Singing Time when you have a monthly song to master for the Primary Program. Christmas is easier because you have more freedom after the Primary Program is done, but even then, I really don't like singing Christmas Songs before Thanksgiving, so I wait until after Thanksgiving which gives me only 3 weeks to practice a Christmas song.

And I really don't like having the Primary come up there just to sing a regular song. If I put in the effort to have the primary give a musical number, I want it to be more like a choir. So, my first year of this calling, I spent the entire year having the kids be comfortable with round songs/descants and eventually they got good enough to do simple harmonies. This year will be my 4th Primary Program in this calling and it has gotten a little easier to teach the children because I've been with the Sunbeams for 3 years in nursery so they are used to how I teach. I usually prepare Easter, Mothers and Fathers Day, and Christmas in addition to the Primary program. That's it. The past 2 years, we had to skip Fathers Day because I'm gone the entire June.

The YM/YW were supposed to do numbers too on some of the Sundays but they have not done a single one until last year when they got a new YW President. And then the ward choir were supposed to do a few Sundays too in addition to the Christmas program. But, we did not have a ward choir leader the entire year. We got one a few weeks before Christmas so we at least had the Christmas program with the ward choir.

If somebody from the Stake would say - no more primary music numbers - I wouldn't mind it at all. Then I can concentrate on teaching gospel principles in Singing Time instead of preparing a musical number.

Edited by anatess, 07 January 2013 - 10:54 AM.


#18 DHK

DHK

    5,000+ posts and hasn't been banned yet...

  • Members
  • 5564 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:50 AM

When I first read the title of this thread, I was thinking back to my missionary days when we had an Elder's Quorum instructor teach that God was a Spirit. My companion and I did our part to correct the instructor in an appropriate manner during the lesson, but even the visiting high councilman let it go.

Yes, false teachings need to be corrected... and I thought the title of the post was towards something like this.


However, the thread isn't about false teachings, but about stewardship, leadership, and inspiration of our leaders.

Here's the key question to ask: Does the CHI preside over your ward/stake? Or does the Bishop & Stake President?

D&C 1:25

25 And inasmuch as they erred it might be made known;


You brought something to light for your Stake President to consider, that wasn't considered before. That was your job as a member to SUSTAIN your Stake President.

But it is HIS job to determine what to do with this newfound information and act upon it.

It is then OUR job to sustain his judgment about this matter because we already did our part.


Now, if they wanted to, this would be an ideal topic to bring up on a 5th Sunday combined RS/Priesthood session that is typically led by the Bishopric.
"But make no mistake about it, brothers and sisters; in the months and years ahead, events will require of each member that he or she decide whether or not he or she will follow the First Presidency. Members will find it more difficult to halt longer between two opinions (see 1 Kings 18:21). President Marion G. Romney said, many years ago, that he had "never hesitated to follow the counsel of the Authorities of the Church even though it crossed my social, professional, or political life" (CR, April 1941, p. 123). This is a hard doctrine, but it is a particularly vital doctrine in a society which is becoming more wicked. In short, brothers and sisters, not being ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ includes not being ashamed of the prophets of Jesus Christ." - Neal A. Maxwell, October 10th, 1978.

http://speeches.byu....viewitem&id=909

#19 kevieb

kevieb

    Member

  • Inactive 1+ year
  • PipPipPip
  • 70 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 11:05 AM

Jenamarie----I really don't know if there are wards that have a lot of musical numbers or not---I just know that we seem to hear from the same people over and over again. The handbook actually recommends that the ward choir perform once a month!!! That's got to be pretty hard for wards that struggle to get a choir together. Anatess and Pam-----not all of us have a thicker skin at times---I spend a lot of my days in tears because of the struggles i am trying to work out---and restoring my testimony is one of them. I was being ridiculed and made fun of because of my question---and it was something that has really bothered me for some time. I had hoped that coming to an LDS support group I would get good LDS advice. There is a big difference between saying things like they are that may be hard for some people to hear-----and just plain ridiculing and making fun of people. I guess I expected more from people who believe the Gospel of Christ----I know he would never have made fun of my question or ridiculed me. I've read through other peoples threads and seen some of the same kinds of responses to people---it made me feel really bad for them. I realize that when you ask a question on the internet that you will get a wide variety of responses---but I didn't expect that people on an LDS board could be so unkind--------just doesn't seem like the Christian way to be. Being a Christian means that we are followers of Christ----and a good practice of being a follower of Christ would be to think, "what would Christ do or say?"

#20 pam

pam

    Keep your hands off my gumdrops.

  • Administrators
  • 51713 posts
  • LocationUtah

Posted 07 January 2013 - 11:13 AM

I realize that when you ask a question on the internet that you will get a wide variety of responses---but I didn't expect that people on an LDS board could be so unkind--------just doesn't seem like the Christian way to be. Being a Christian means that we are followers of Christ----and a good practice of being a follower of Christ would be to think, "what would Christ do or say?"


Well you opened this open and and so freely chastised those who were only giving their opinion on the information they had, so I will respond. I don't think that Christ would come to an internet site and talk badly about the church leaders that He sustained to do their callings. Yet you have started more than one thread where you are disatisfied with the way the Priesthood leaders in your ward or stake have handled things.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

IPB Skin By Virteq