cbcmariners77

The language has to be something that non-members will understand. So calling them "sermons" is perfect.

Whereas our stake goes overboard and has them every month and they're always fundraising meetings, whether for upcoming projects, or for Friends of Scouting.

I believe that (first quote), according to doctrine. I believe my intial question was in line with what Mormon Music (second quote) had a question about: what's the difference between keys and no keys if someone else higher than we, who OF COURSE we are going to obey, will always be able to "overrule" or make ultimate decisions. However, since I posed the initial question, I have received a few other answers that are helping me to make sense of things. Thanks!

I'm not actually a high priest group leader. Were you perhaps speaking to someone else's comment? Without having quoted someone, I assume maybe the guy before you? Just want to make sure. I realize the high priests group leader has no keys.

I appreciate the last two responses, and the one I got off-line, too. One person just assured me that even though the stake president holds the keys within the stake, they should allow the high counselors train and then let the EQ presidents learn how to use their keys, without turning the stake into the "super ward" concept. He told me that action is like giving our young men keys, but rather than train them how to use them, then allow them to learn through trial-and-error (which builds growth), often time the bishop might just tell them how he wants it and then make them do everything by instructions (which teaches them to become slothful servants). This totally makes sense. His final word: not all stake presidents are so hands-on and unpersuaded to let their EQ presidents grow, so my confusion was understandable. As a former stake president (him), he told me to just be obedient and do my best and soon, I'd be able to use my keys more fully. This was nice to hear. Thank you to this and the last two public comments. That was encouraging and helped foster a better understanding!

Because, though it be a misrepresentation of your good name and should therefore be considered a passive form of libel (without actual malice), all that is required of the moderator is to do the bare legal minimum :). (That was completely meant as a joke.)

I really don't like the poll, that's for sure. He DID do the bare minimum. But "burn the devil!" seems like it doesn't fit, either.

Yeah. I suppose. This is the first calling I've had that has had "keys," and that's why I'm praying and studying and trying to figure out the darned difference between this and any other calling that I had which didn't have keys but which I used fasting, prayer, subsequent inspiration and hard work to make sure everything turned out OK.

I like your analysis. I guess that's my point. In this case, Mom keeps telling me I have the ability to do the dishes however I want, except, I see that's not really the case. So, my question, then, is: what does Mom really mean when she says I have the ability to direct my own dishwashing? Nice analogy :).

Thanks for your comments.

No, that's not the question at all. Whether you work well with or don't work well with is not the question. H, for example, work very well with my stake president. However, if he's running my quorum, then I'm not running my quorum. So, what are the keys for? I hear and read to direct the labor. But what is NOT being written? Trust me, I know the handbook.

A high priest group leader does not have priesthood keys like an elders quorum president, so even though the group and quorum are so darned similar, while I still think the group leader would use inspiration like any calling would require, it would be good for them to take some cues from the stake president. I mean, technically, since the stake president is the president over that group, they'd be the ones directing the labors in that portion of the vineyard. But what about an elders quorum president? An EQ president has keys, right? Doesn't that mean implementing things, making decisions, leading in administrative and minstrative tasks? Example: In my own PPI for EQ, however, I was told that the presidency could do home teaching interviews, but ONLY the president was to do PPIs. I asked this second counselor, "well, President, why is it that YOU can do a PPI as a counselor, but my counselors can't?" I never really got a good answer. It doesn't say in the book that the EQ counselors can't do this! However, the trump card is played. So, when a person has priesthood keys, but someone else is always turning them for you, how is a person even using their keys? I realize there is a chain of command, all the way up through the prophet. But if someone else is micromanaging every move you make, are you really directing the labors? Are you really given the opportunity to use the inspiration you receive? I just throw this out here to see if anyone else has had this experience, has any insights, etc. I don't need a lecture about how I should get my own answers... trust me, I am getting answers. But information leads to inspiration and I'm not above getting that in a myriad of different ways :).

A person who needs to be commanded in all things is a slothful and unwise servant. I love when I read home teaching comments on the message board and people point out the relief society has certain practices, but elders or high priests are not allowed to do the same sort of things because it doesn't specifically give a privilege to do it that way in the book. BUT, it doesn't say you can't, either. What ever happened to fasting and mighty prayer in an effort to seek inspiration and revelation? Unless the handbook specifically points out NOT to do a certain practice, have we really gotten this far away from the promptings of the Spirit?

No boubt adoubt it! The fancy ones always have the rubber stopper go out. The bottles work better. Additionally, anything made of glass WILL break. As careful as I've been, I've had it happen. Plus the plastic droppers are dirt cheap. In fact, our ward bought a whole box of them

Acronyms are one thing. Let's remember that not everyone even knows what an elder is. But at some point, we have to be able to say elders quorum president without having to explain it all the time. That being said, I agree that too often we use too many acronyms. We should do it like a rule of references in journalism, where the first time through we spell it all out, and then put the abbreviation behind it, parenthetically. Then, after that, we can just use the abbreviation.