- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I moved this comment here, so that we could discuss it apart from the other thread where it was posted: by flowerdrops » Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:02 pm
Quote:I mentioned earlier in this thread that sometimes within my stake, the silly rules and formalities we are expected to follow are referred to as “Packer Policy”. I just came across this talk by Pres. Packer that left me very annoyed. Even the title speaks volumes… “The Unwritten Order Of Things”I was given a bit of hope listening to conference this weekend (once again Uchtdorf nailed it -love the guy!) that we are slowly putting more emphasis on Christ and the gospel, and less on The Church. The Church is just a means of delivering the gospel. Sometimes members seem to be so obsessed with the “delivery man” that they overlook the package (gospel).
I am curious what you all think of this talk. I certainly hope it is the last of its kind!
http://emp.byui.edu/huffr/The%20Unwritten%20Order%20of%20Things%20–%20Boyd%20K.%20Packer.htm Hey Ray! Thanks for giving this its own thread! I look forward to all your comments.
Quote:“Bishops should not yield the arrangement of meetings to members. They should not yield the arrangement for funerals or missionary farewells to families. It is not the proper order of things for members or families to expect to decide who will speak and for how long.”
Mission farewells I can understand because they usually take place in Sacrament Meeting, but funerals? Seriously! He says this is because only the gospel should be preached, not stories about the deceased. I certainly hope I don’t die while still living in Packer’s stake, where “Packer Policy” is upheld. They are very strict on baptisms here as well. When one of my children were baptized, they were the ONLY one from the stake being baptized that month, and still – we had NO say in who got to speak. The stake selected members from another ward whom we did not even know. How much more special could that day have been if we could have selected family members to speak to my child?!! Ridiculous!
flowerdrops wrote:Mission farewells I can understand because they usually take place in Sacrament Meeting, but funerals? Seriously! He says this is because only the gospel should be preached, not stories about the deceased. I certainly hope I don’t die while still living in Packer’s stake, where “Packer Policy” is upheld.
yes, I agree with you FD. Funerals, while lovely when the ward can teach gospel principles that help remind us of the eternal nature of things, and the loss of a loved one is not a final separation…all that is good, but most important is the time for families to mourn, and the ward to mourn with those that mourn. It seems to me the needs of the family must be considered, not try to make something so personal as a funeral service try to be a missionary opportunity or something like that which is not he purpose of the meeting. Should I be treated that way with a bishop for a family member of mine, I would simply choose to hold the service elsewhere so the bishop doesn’t preside, but the family does.flowerdrops wrote:They are very strict on baptisms here as well. When one of my children were baptized, they were the ONLY one from the stake being baptized that month, and still – we had NO say in who got to speak. The stake selected members from another ward whom we did not even know. How much more special could that day have been if we could have selected family members to speak to my child?!! Ridiculous!
While that sounds ridiculous, I actually agree with making baptisms coordinated and run by the bishop. It is a meeting service where the person is covenanting to be part of the church, and so it is a church meeting, not a personal or family celebration like a birthday party or something. In some areas with lots of kids, it makes sense to combine the meetings, but I would hope the bishop would ask each family for suggestions on who should participate, and accommodate as much as possible. However, bottom line, the 8 year old should be ready to covenant to follow the church rules, which is a good lesson for them starting them off in the gospel. Sometimes it can become more about the parents and what they want, and not about the child and what they need to be taught. I hope I don’t sound cold about that…when I was in a bishopric and over primary, I always let the families give input and only one time was there a conflict that I had to remind them it is a church meeting and the bishop presides, not their meeting or their church.That’s what I felt Elder Packer was expressing about missionary farewells, and that applies to baptisms too..but I feel differently about funerals to a degree.
This part of the talk by Packer really struck me: Quote:I was on a plane once with President Kimball who, I think, served for 19 years as a stake clerk. A member that lived in the stake at that time was on the plane. He said to me, “If I’d known that our stake clerk was going to be President of the Church, I’d have treated him a lot better.”
Brother Kimball was actually serving as second counselor in the stake presidency when the stake clerk moved. They called a clerk and that clerk moved. Brother Kimball had taken over the responsibility. Brother Melvin J. Ballard came to conference, and he said, “You shouldn’t have to be the second counselor and the stake clerk at the same time. You choose which you would rather be.”
Brother Kimball was not used to having a choice. He wanted to have Brother Ballard tell him, but Brother Ballard said, “No, you choose.” So Brother Kimball said, “I have a typewriter. [Very few people had typewriters then.] I know the system. I think I can make a bigger contribution if I stay as the stake clerk.” And so it was.
In those days the stake clerk received a small stipend, a little monthly something or other, I suppose to buy supplies. A sister, who knew him well, wrote and said, “Spencer, I’m surprised at you—to take a calling just because there is money involved.”
Then she said, “If you don’t change your attitude, within two months, you’ll apostatize from the Church.” Well, she was a little off in her timing!
It seems people say things to others all the time in the church. SWK was criticized by a sister in the church. He did not let it affect his testimony. Its too bad people always seem to be judgmental…but I guess it is just the way life is, and its more important if we let it bother us or just prove them wrong with actions.
Heber… very good points on baptisms. When I served in the primary I was over baptisms for our ward. Though we never had any problems in our ward I know a lot of others wards had families who made big stinks. One popular thing I heard families doing (not allowed in our stake but done in others) was to baptize their kids at Lake Powell while vacationing there. I am not sure how it worked, but I always pictured family members standing around in bathing suits! (Then again, it could make for an amazing family experience) I have always been one to stick to the rules. Some things aren’t worth making a fuss over. Without order comes chaos, but then again… too much order can also take away from the experience of things, and extinguish inspiration.
flowerdrops wrote:Without order comes chaos, but then again… too much order can also take away from the experience of things, and extinguish inspiration.
That’s a great quote!!!Heber13 wrote:That’s a great quote!!!
Thanks. A FlowerDrops original!
Isn’t the unwritten order of things more or less written in the CHI (which members do not have much access to)? I think the funeral rules are unfamily.
😆 Whatever that means. I just think that the whole point of a funeral is to bring people/family together to reflect on the life of a loved one.I guess I’ve “lucked out” in the baptism department. My son and one other boy from our ward were the only baptisms that month, so me and the other mother were asked to speak. I think our stake does an incredible job of involving family or friends/leaders wherever possible.
However, I’d love it if I could be a witness for a baptism like women used to be able to back in the olden days. Oh well.
I’m still reading the talk. I’ll be honest, it is very hard for me to read. It makes me not want to stay LDS. UGH I once joked with a member friend of mine that I should compile a list of myths I hear about the Holy Ghost at church that are not true. We even shared a couple. This stemmed from a comment made in SS once that you can’t feel the Spirit if there are children making noise. I said that mothers would never be able to receive the impressions of the HG if that was true!
Anyway, here is another for the list:
Quote:Often the Spirit is repulsed by humorous experiences or jokes when the time could be devoted to teaching the things of the Spirit, even the sacred things.
I’m sorry, but some of the most precious moments of my life have been spent reminiscing and laughing with my family and loved ones. And I mean laughing until tears spurted out my eyes. Laughter is divine when it is positive laughter (not the kind that would degrade). It does not “chase” the Spirit away!
I will say that some of the jokes I hear from my bishop and stake president (teasing eachother at the pulpit or whatever) make me uncomfortable and I would love to see that kind of “humor” discontinued.
Another “unwritten” order is that the sacrament is served to the bishop first before anyone else can be served. I think that is ridiculous and so is the whole sitting on the proper side thing. When I was in the RS presidency our stake RS counselor told us we had to remain sitting in the front of the room for the whole meeting. It makes it hard to participate and see the teacher. It just seems a lot unimportant to me.
How much chaos can really occur from all the sacrament trays being handed out at the same time or the bishopric counselors sitting next to eachother rather than flanking the bish?
😳 Quote:It bothers me to see on a sacrament meeting program that Liz and Bill and Dave will participate. Ought it not be Elizabeth and William and David? It bothers me more to be asked to sustain Buck or Butch or Chuck to the high council. I just say, Can’t we have the full names on that important record? There is a formality, a dignity, that we are losing—and it is at great cost. There is something to what Paul said about doing things “decently and in order.”
What if the shortened version is your actual legal name?!?! What is this great cost we are losing to informality? Why can’t we leave off all the titles and go back to the days of “Brother Joseph” and “Sister Emma?” Was that really so awful?
Why does something as small as peoples names bother him so much? I feel kinda bad that he is bothered by things that are so inconsequential.
Quote:An essential attribute of a leader in the Church is faithful and loyal followship.
That’s probably true. I’ve never heard the word “followship” before.
Brother Packer has had a hard life. Let us remember his generation was drafted into a war that wasn’t a video game war. He went into it likely believing it was his holy duty. He came out of it likely still believing all that terrible ugliness was his holy duty. From what I can tell, that is still his faith. It’s conceivable a human could live decades after such a reality-challenging experience without ever coming to the point of disowning it. Imagine what the cost would be to a good soldier to disown the duty he performed in good faith. If nothing else, seeing him in the position he fills might give us all a chance to ponder on the terrible human and spiritual cost of just war. Tom
Tom Haws wrote:Brother Packer has had a hard life. Let us remember his generation was drafted into a war that wasn’t a video game war. He went into it likely believing it was his holy duty. He came out of it likely still believing all that terrible ugliness was his holy duty. From what I can tell, that is still his faith. It’s conceivable a human could live decades after such a reality-challenging experience without ever coming to the point of disowning it. Imagine what the cost would be to a good soldier to disown the duty he performed in good faith. If nothing else, seeing him in the position he fills might give us all a chance to ponder on the terrible human and spiritual cost of just war.
Tom
Such a good point! Chain of command is very important in the military…so are titles and such.
Thanks Tom
WAR SUCKS!!!!
Tom… I appreciate how you are able to get to the heart of people, and root of their actions. You are better able to understand and empathize with others than most. I admit, I have never been a fan of Packer. Maybe I should study more of his life so I can better understand were he is coming from.
Urgh. I admit I kind of hate on this talk. There were 2 times Packer gave more or less this same talk. Neither was a GC address, so I feel free to take it with a big grain of salt. The 12 have often pushed their own personal agendas and decried personal pet peeves. If there is a clear divergence of opinion on something (like evolution), I assume it’s up for debate and therefore not doctrine. If there aren’t at least 2 or 3 of them saying the same thing, I have to assume it’s just that one of them has a bee in his bonnet about something. This to me is clearly a bee in bonnet scenario. I did blog about it, though. Read if you dare:
http://mormonmatters.org/2009/06/02/taking-the-fun-out-of-funerals/ ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://mormonmatters.org/2009/06/02/taking-the-fun-out-of-funerals/ One of my least favorite talks of all time. Caused me some gray hair. When my oldest daughter turned eight, my in-laws wanted to come out and be part of the baptism. We live about 800 miles from our closest relative. So was twelve of them that decide to drive out here to Oregon, and they give us a weekend they could make it. We also live 120 miles from from the closest baptismal font. So we ask if we can baptize her out here where the branch members live so they could be part of it, and this would have been our first baptism in the branch — EVER. The answer – “No way.” Okay, so we say fine, we will all drive up to the Stake Center, but would it be okay if we have the baptism on the weekend that the family can get a couple of days off work so they can be part of it. The answer – “No way.” I pointed out to the SP that we have baptisms in the stake on different weekends and even weekdays, and that they baptize people in the Deuschute River all the time. He says “they only do that with new converts, and that no baptisms of record will be allowed except on the first Saturday of the month at the Stake Center. No exceptions.” I felt pretty burned and a little bit bitter I admit, some of it was directed at Mr. Packer. My father-in-law, who is actually a Bishop from Utah, suggested that we just wait a year and then baptize the kid — which would make her a convert baptism and not a baptism of record. So that’s what we did. Four months after she turn eight and several “conversations” with concerned church leaders about the “spiritual welfare and eternal salvation” of my daughter (I honest to god think they were afraid she would get in accident and die unbaptized 😮 ), the SP called our Branch Pres and gave us permission to go ahead and let us plan the baptism as we saw fit.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.