Leaderboard

Just a thought. I hadn't seen a thread on it, but just around the corner (in a little over a week) is General Conference (Oct 3-4) starting at 10 AM MST. Events - October 2020 General Conference

I use to think I got the importance of using the Church's real name but Pres Nelson seems to be emphasizing it more than the importance I have been ascribing to it so now it's got me wondering.

Personally, I am very much edified by "elevating our use of the name He revealed for His restored Church..."

Thank you. Please be reminded that I am looking for a reference (originally requested of the OP), and while I appreciate your replies, you might provide one from your personal contacts: Did these General Authorities tell you that they “signed over their property” and “were given an assignment to be stewards over that property” as posted in the OP (3rd - 5th paragraphs)? @Carborendum in case you missed my original request: Posted yesterday at 09:35 AM Thank you!

Unwise and possibly a sacrilege. My position has always been thus: The difference between Communism and the Law of Consecration is declaring whose property it is. Capitalism says everything belongs to the individual. administered by the individual accountable to market forces Communism says everything belongs to the collective. administered by men who usually crave power accountable to no one but themselves The Law of Consecration says everything belongs to the Lord. administered by the individuals having stewardship and men who are called of God. accountable to the Lord and the people within the system Now look at the hypothetical you offer. Everything belongs to the Lord. administered by people just winging it. accountable to people just winging it. Where is the Lord in that? Alternative: Individuals wishing to live the principles of the LoC without a formal structure. Everything "I own" actually belongs to the Lord. I'm a steward over HIS stuff. I'm accountable to Him for how I administer it. I fear that when "people get together" without the Lord's blessing on the system, they're doomed for failure. And if they take it upon themselves to believe that the Lord wanted them to do this, it potentially leads to apostasy and cultish behavior.

As a youth I knew Hugh B Brown - Hugh B Brown's daughter married the Bishop in my best friend's ward - My best friend did yard work for the Bishop and whenever Elder Brown would visit (which was often to relax by a private pool) I would help my friend with his work so we could spend time talking with Elder Brown. On my mission I met Legrand Richards and drove him through Oregon for mission meetings. Stephan L Richards was the father of a close friend - I never met Elder Richards other than through stories from his son. Boyd K Packer and my mother were school friends and my uncle (Father's brother) was his best friend and served with him during WWII and I use to car pool with his son to work. Two Emeritus 70's - one is Larry Corbridge who was once my Stake President (still living) and also someone I knew in my youth - actually I knew his sister and the other is Robert L. Backman (still living and the oldest GA) that was my mission president - he performed my wife's and my temple marriage - myself and a few other missionaries were planning a birthday party for him earlier this year when we had to cancel because of COVID. The Traveler

I love The Inspector General! I grew up watching TCM, but it wasn't until I bought a "Family Pack" from the five dollar bin that I discovered that movie. Kaye is so funny! It was It's a Wonderful Life. One of my absolute favorites; I'll watch it any time of year. If I remember correctly, part of the reason it flopped so hard was because of a May release date. Fun thing I discovered: if you remember, one of the angels says, "You'll spend that hour getting to know that man." Once, I timed it and the amount of screen time we spend with Clarence "getting to know" George is longer than an hour, which, to me, says something about God's timing. Hot dog! I have to ask @JohnsonJones and @LadyGunnar have you seen Cary Grant in I Was a Male War Bride? Pure hilarity! I'm a sucker for screwball comedies, though. I'm more likely to dislike a popular movie than to like something that's unpopular, if that makes sense. Although, my best friend did tell me she didn't like Dan In Real Life, which I absolutely adore!

I'll admit that I kind of fall into the above category. I'm an adult, that can't stand (capable) freeloaders and I expect others to carry a portion of the load, again when capable. Perhaps one of my many shortcomings.

To answer my own question: Our nuclear families are the basic example of living a true united order as an expression of consecration. All income into the family is pooled and then meted out according to need and desire. Families are usually as financially successful as their leaders make them, so Dad and Mom make it or break it. I have spoken with a few couples (mostly in my earlier adult years, while I and they were both still young, 20s or 30s) who chose to keep separate books, combining expenses such as rent but keeping other budgets separate. Privately, I always found this vaguely repulsive, though of course I didn't burden them with my opinion. I believe this same system could work, and work well, in an extended family of adult brothers and sisters, perhaps even between cousins. But the larger the family generation included, the more people have to be committed to loving and helping each other and not worrying about everything being "fair". Indeed, an insistence of fairness is the death of any real united order. So while I am sure there are some family groups somewhere who successfully practice this extended united-order-style idea, I can only suppose it's exceedingly rare and probably fragile. I think it is unwise to try to practice this sort of united order between non-relatives, even good friends, without being commanded by God and led by authorities duly set apart under Priesthood assignment for that duty. I do not believe it is immoral to do so, but I think it is almost certain to lead to a bad end. When I was very young, I would occasionally hear my parents and relatives talk about what they called "the law of consecration", but which as an adult I recognize more precisely as the united order. I heard them say that they hoped that, when the time came, they could be monetary contributors rather than takers. I thought that was a noble thing, and I took it to heart. I was an adult before I realized that those good and virtuous intentions were misplaced. Get a group of ignorant and impoverished people who take their united order seriously, as a true expression of the law of consecration, and who are willing to work hard and care for each other, and it is almost a given that they will succeed and flourish in time, probably in a very short time. Get a group of successful, educated adults who view everything in monetary terms and are always careful to look out for freeloaders and want to police things so that everyone does their fair share, and it is absolutely a given that they will not have the Spirit, and their "united order" will quickly dissolve into bickering, finger-pointing, and disunity.

Is it unwise to live a united order as an expression of the law of consecration without the express command of God?

The only source I have is through personal contact. As far as I know there is no public information. As I stated previously the primary focus for anyone ought to be their own covenants. If you hold a current temple recommend - it is my personal opinion that you ought to be living the law and covenant of Concentration and Stewardship. This kind of reminds me of a person that asked Mozart how to write music. Mozart replied that the person was too young and the person replied that Mozart was only 6 when he wrote his first master peace. Mozart replied that he did not have to ask anyone how. It is my personal opinion that if someone does not want to live the law and covenant - obviously they are not ready. If they desire such a thing - it is most likely they are not worried about what others are doing. The Traveler

There was another chapter to this story. Apparently one of the boys was quite capable with the needle and thread. He went to the waste portions of the clothing manufacturer and picked out the pieces that were big enough to make himself a pair of pants that were very much like "the latest trendy pants." As such, he was the envy of all the boys there. It created a stir enough that some investigating was done. The bishop decided that since he didn't steal anything, there was nothing wrong with what he did. But he asked if the boy would allow the clothing mill to use his pants as a pattern to make new pants for all the other boys. So, as the boys wanted the new pattern, they wore out the seats (without wearing out the knees). Only then could they get the "Jordache Jeans". I'm sorry. I'm showing my age. I mean "Dockers."

Two thoughts. First - the general authorities that I have know personally - keep their personal lives personal. This is not the type of item General Authorities want to brag about or make a big deal of in public. The things from their personal lives are carefully guarded but may be referenced from time to time when it is thought to be beneficial for the Saints. I am also aware that it is possible to be obedient and live according to the covenant of the Law of Concentration and Stewardship - I am also aware of many (with emphasis on many) of the Latter-day Saints that are not general authorities that are living the according to that covenant. Second - The absents of evidence is not evidence of absents. That a source is not sited does not mean that there is no one living the Law of Concentration and Stewardship. This should not be a question in our hearts concerning what others are doing. The question before us all - is what is the desire of our hearts. The Traveler

Often I tend to be blunt and show little emotion. This is not by accident. It has been my personal experience that ignoring logic and being emotional is a recipe for disaster. My dear wife, who is much better in social settings often suggests that my bluntness in conversations are rude. Enough about me. My father was both successful and wise which took him very quickly from relative poverty to great wealth. He grew up during the depression in a small 3 bedroom home with 13 siblings. He raised his children to work as he had learned to work. He believed that when children reached the age of accountably (8) that they should earn their own money and pay for their cloths and any other non essentials - like family vacations. We were also required to do service - we were expected to be the first to arrive and the last to leave. If any of us complained his response was always that we would never be expected to do as much or more than him. He had enough cash to pay for the most expensive home in our stake - but he never did. He did not drive a new car - it was always a beater - often requiring "special" knowledge to open doors, starting, rolling up and down the windows or other things. If I could compare my father to some historical person - I would compare him to King Benjamin. It is my believe that wealth is the most likely result of living righteously (living according to covenant with G-d). But the great temptation of wealth and riches is pride. The kind of pride that convinces people that they "deserve" better than others. Usually (always) this is demonstrated by "things" that can be purchased for money. Sometimes even poor people will demonstrate such pride by thinking they deserve what belongs to others - This is also called coveting. And so they wish that they had more money so that they could "have" what they deserve. I believe it is very clear that there is no place in "Heaven" for the prideful. Those that adorn themselves or wish to adorn or present themselves with things will have similar difficulty getting into heaven as a full grown camel will have in passing through the eye of a needle. Jesus even made it clear that in using wealth as an offering to the poor to be seen or respected of others - is of the same prideful cloth as those with opulent attire or things to be seen and adored by others. This pride of adornment has corrupted much of our entertainment and is the engine of hate that is the outgrowth of covetousness that destroyed the Nephits and is destroying the United States of America. I find myself struggling and often reproved by others for my pride - Perhaps the greatest temptation of pride is to think we as an individual are rid of it. Or thinking we are better than others at avoiding it. The Traveler

Side question. Could we look at callings the same way we look at property. Nothing is truly ours, we only have the illusion of ownership, God gives all and gives us stewardship over what is his. Callings are only additions to our stewardship. However, because of the illusion of ownership, we treat our property better than we treat our callings. But in reality they are equal.