- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
About 8 months ago I received a new calling – bishop. I’ve been debating for some time whether to share it on this forum or not. Part of me fears that I’ll be “outed” and another part of me feels like a hypocrite to both orthodox members and also to my more liberal self. In my personal life at church I’ve adopted the approach that teachings can be interpreted in a number of ways and that it depends on the person’s interpretation. In my public role as bishop I haven’t yet been asked to address a topic that I’ll struggle with, but I’m sure it’s coming. I suspect that I’ll try to share my true feelings and will try to do so in a way that is non-controversial or which focuses on aspects I do agree with for the topic. The calling wasn’t totally surprising since I’ve been a counselor but it was something I genuinely didn’t want. The time burden can be crushing. I feel my testimony falls far short of being what a bishop’s testimony should be but I accepted hoping that I can influence my own little sphere (aka ward) for the better, and I also felt that as bishop I might influence for the better the type of experience my own children have in the LDS church. I feel that if I only do things that are easy for me or if I will only work in a perfect organization, then nothing will ever change. I also accepted because I feel my role is really not about doctrine but about serving others.
One thing I want to point out that I do think the church is moving in the right direction, albeit slowly. My feeling is that at the highest levels of the church there is an understanding of the challenges the church is facing regarding history and doctrine and power sharing, and I believe there is a (hopefully growing) minority that is pushing for more tolerance and acceptance. At the local level I see both encouraging and discouraging signs – a mixed bag. I do think it will take a generation or longer to change some things, and that some geographical areas will change more quickly than others. In my own stake about half the bishops seem to be “old school” and the other half seem to be more moderate and progressive. A couple of bishops seem almost liberal.
One other observation. People seem to see what they want to see in leaders. I am fairly liberal and people who know me well will tell you that. I’m quite certain that acquaintances believe I’m traditional. I’m willing to bet it’s the same with many others across the church. It’s this ambiguity that some days fills me with hope and some days makes me think if I’m living in some alternate universe.
Sharing because I haven’t participated for months here. I value this forum a great deal and read the posts here several times a week to keep me grounded.
I have known Bishops who felt woefully inadequate and expressed things similarly as you have here. By and large, they were the best Bishops I’ve ever known.
Roadrunner wrote:I’ve been debating for some time whether to share it on this forum or not.
I hope you find a comfortable way to share what you want. I think a lot of us would be very grateful.
Thanks for sharing this Roadrunner. I fear being outed sometimes, too, but I also know my SP understands there are those who have questions and doubts and I’m one of them. I posted this week that I wish I could share some of the experiences I have had the past couple months, but part of the reason I don’t is fear of being outed to people who are not the stake president. I do not present myself as an orthodox member and I do openly share that I had been inactive for a number of years – but I’m sure the general perception is that I am generally orthodox (as in your own observation). With the president’s encouragement and assistance, I am also quite comfortable that my purpose at the moment is to influence others for good – those others being good people who might (or maybe should) be StayLDS participants. I also see the ship turning. I read comments here and on other boards about stake presidents and bishops sharing things they supposedly got in training that my stake president doesn’t share. He does, by the way, share something each meeting that he has gotten from training with GAs and AAs, and they are never along the lines of directives to “crack down” or “investigate” anything like unto it. They tend to be very much along the lines of loving the members and looking after the one. I don’t think he does this for my benefit, and quite frankly I question those who assert otherwise on the internet – I really don’t believe the upper levels of church leadership are anything less than caring and I do believe they really are concerned with major issues in the church and how they affect the membership. One of the things I tell people all the time is that I wish all members had the opportunity to sit in council like I do – it really is an uplifting experience.
I did notice you hadn’t shared much lately, Roadrunner and just chalked it up to you being busy. I’m sure you are. I think more comments from people like you would be of benefit to the forum.
Unfortunately, just like local leadership, area leadership also can be a crap shoot and vary from Area Authority to Area Authority. There always will be shepherds, and there always will be guards – and most people will not be able to distinguish between the two relative to themselves. (In other words, most guards see themselves as shepherds and would be shocked to be told they are guards.) All of us are blind to our own blind spots. Every single human is unique and individual, and we can’t escape our own personalities and experiences – and it takes concerted, intense, focused, intentional effort (or a seismic shift from some life-altering event) to change our paradigms and perspectives.
I also believe the top leadership wants more inclusivity and less divisiveness – but middle-lower level managers often aren’t in sync with top leaders. It can be exasperating, and it sounds flippant to say, “That’s life” – but that really is life.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.