- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I don’t have a problem with the CHI being given out on a need to know basis – which means priesthood leadership mostly. I agree with Ray, people WOULD quote the handbook at you if you were a leader. I’ve done it before when a High Councilor insisted that I implement the HT District Supervisor concept. The brethren in my quorum lacked so much commitment it would’ve just been an administrative effort that went nowhere. So, I used the fact that it wasn’t in the handbook as my prime reason for doing doing it; he backed down.
The leadership uses it to justify their own decisions, like when our SP went to Stake Child of Record Baptisms — when everyone was used to having their own personal baptisms.
SilentDawning wrote:The leadership uses it to justify their own decisions, like when our SP went to Stake Child of Record Baptisms — when everyone was used to having their own personal baptisms.
Absolutely. However, just think how awful it would be if EVERYONE in the ward/branch started doing the exact same thing. Ouch.
😡 Quote:Is the Church Handbook of Instructions considered Doctrine? To what extent should it’s contents be STRICTLY observed? Under what circumstances is it open to interpretation?
I think there is quite a lot of it open to interpretation. When I was in the bishopric…we had many late night meetings because the bishop and me and the other councilor interpreted things so differently, and when the bishop went to the SP for guidance, he was told to pray about it and decide.
It was a good lesson for me on seeing how the church is intended to be led spiritually…not through rule books (although it all depends on the leader you have at the time, IMO).
Am I wrong in understanding that a woman is never on the short list for seeing the handbook? This bothers me some if it is true. I read through a bit of the 2006 handbook last night and do see what Ray is saying about some of it being open to interpretation and spiritual guidance. I was concerned about the specific advice regarding garments. They specifically said not to remove them to do yard work or to stay in your swimsuit in the home. I don’t do either of those things often but I do like to stay in my swimsuit and a cover up awhile after swimming especially on a hot day (I live in Canada so those hot days are few and far between) and I didn’t realize this was against the rules. I just felt controlled in some way after reading that paragraph. I agree that I might actually start using that handbook to prove my point or correct leadership and with this latest reading I actually feel like I should keep myself in the dark about this. I really felt aggrevated after the reading I did. Sigh.
I don’t like “should” in most cases, but I’m ok with it in the context of the CHI – because it isn’t must or shall or will . . . 👿 Should still leaves the choice in the hands of the individual – especially if the individual is ok taking “should” with a grain of salt.As for the short list for seeing the handbook, almost nobody is on the short list for seeing the entire handbook. A High Councilor isn’t on that list, for example. Sections are distributed according to the responsibilities of the callings. However, every member is supposed to be able to see it to ask about a specific policy, in the presence of someone who has access to the section that includes that policy.
That’s how it’s supposed to work. Not saying it does all or most of the time, but that’s another issue of the disconnect between the actual policy and how it gets implemented at the local level.
Wow I had no idea that the church handbook of instructions is not considered doctrine. Great question and answers! I just came across this thread again and figured I should point out here that it was stated explicitly in the recent CHI training that the CHI is not the same “standard” as scripture but represents the best understanding of the current leadership. So, the apostles don’t consider the CHI to be “doctrine”. We go to a lot of effort to make distinctions between what is and what is not ‘doctrine’. I understand the motivation, of course. And I appreciate as much as anyone the featured articlegood questions, doug. I think for me, I am not content just saying I believe what I believe and that’s good enough. I seem to be driven to find greater meaning, more knowledge, understand things better. I often take things like the word “doctrine” and try to ask myself…do I really know what that means? I say it all the time, but what is church doctrine and what is not?
I guess I think as humans, we’re always striving for greater meaning in our lives, therefore, we play these games to stimulate our thinking and our faith.
I think the distinction is very important – since it allows for many people in many instances to feel less pressure to accept things that they can see as not being immutable, eternal, inflexible, etc. I personally don’t care all that much for myself, but not everyone is as secure in their heterodoxy as I am in mine. I had this discussion with my HC during lunch today. After I talked about some of the issues in our branch implosions, and suggested we eliminate SS, and go to a two hour block to consolidate and focus our limited teacher talents for the betterment of the branch, I told him very forcefully that the CHI is not doctrine or a set of commandments. He was utterly baffled by the concept, said he had never thought of it, but agreed to think about it and talk with the BP and SP about the possibility. I’m not holding my breath.
He was completely taken back that I knew more about the CHI changes and the world wide training than he did, especially because he knows I didn’t attend. He was also unaware of the changes in the “Temple worthy” wording in regards to ordinations and confirmations, and just couldn’t comprehend why I had ANY kind of concern about such a thing. He was quite stunned when I told him that it flew in the face of BKP Spring GC talk, and that I would be unable to participate in many of my family traditions if this rule is strictly enforced. I seriously don’t think this individual understands the dynamics in the church. Don’t get me wrong, he is a great guy, but he can’t grasp why I or anyone would be on the fringes of the church, suffering a crisis of faith, and still be “good people” living the gospel, holding a PH calling and kind of active. It’s like there is this mentality that only sinners doubt and “apostatize” from the church.
BTW – I did use many of the BKP and Beck quotes from Ray’s report. The HC response to most of them, “Oh, I don’t remember him/her saying that?” Haha. Most people will only hear what they are listening for to begin with. I know I generally do.
Glad to be of service friend. :ugeek: Your last two sentences are important for all of us to remember – both of them equally.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.