Fether

does the stewardship of a father or priesthood leader provide further inspiration when they are seeking to help?

I agree, I think every blessing can be sacred. I’m just curious if there is a general order to things. I remember hearing once that we should try to get as close to the keys over us as possible. That means ministering brother, then elders quorum President, then bishop

My main question is who to seek for when it comes to getting a blessing. Someone who has Stewardship, someone who knows you and has spiritual strength, or does it not matter? I have a friend who has been needing regular priesthood blessings. They only seem to ask friends instead of those who have stewardship over them. My approach has always been the opposite, to follow the stewardship so I can get as close to the keys that are over me… though I don’t have a strong defense for why this is best. It is just what I feel best about.

I love your thoughts on this. Ill add that I think we often (at least I do) devalue our spiritual experiences unless they are some overwhelming or seemingly miraculous event. I would argue that studying scriptures and realizing we haven’t had charity for others is a spiritual experience. Choosing to go to the temple and do temple work for a family member is a spiritual experience on its own right. Even though these are not some overwhelming sensation accompanied by tears, they are feelings that are not natural to human beings, but rather inspired by the spirit.

Assuming it’s a normal situation and you have access to everyone on your ward and all your friends, when seeking a priesthood blessing should you seek out a person you trust, someone who has stewardship (father, ministering brothers, or priesthood leader), or does it not matter, any priesthood holding joe-schmoe will do?

I’ll add those to my list. I enjoy the way Bednar talks and explains things, there is this energy behind it that I just love. I imagine I will like them.

I agree. And it seems many belief the response is proportional to the risk

I was listening to the “All In” Podcast today and in i, the person being interviewed tells the story about how she wouldn’t read the Book of Mormon all the way through because she was scared of not having a spiritual experience confirming to her the truth of it. It got me thinking about the whole deal of people being confused as to why they don’t have these spiritual and emotional reactions to praying to know the truth of the Book of Mormon, or going to the temple, getting sealed in the temple, watching their child give birth, saying prayer, bearing testimony, and so on. I wonder if we can compare it to when someone stresses about having too high of a pulse. That feeling caused by the desire is preventing the desire. We see the same in sales. If someone is struggling the sell and aren’t making money, stress sets in and that stress is visible by the person they are trying to sell to and then the cycle continues. So a couple questions I’ll pose: - Does the church (in its publications or from its leaders) encourage specific spiritual experiences? Like to feel overwhelmed by the spirit, or feel peace when we read scriptures, particularly Moroni 10:3-5? - Are we culturally encouraged to have these experiences? Is this bad? - Can we expect to have these experiences? - Does God really speak to us all differently? - Are we better off seeking after righteousness and just letting spiritual experiences come? Or should we be seeking spiritual experiences? So far, I feel like we need to stop seeking these experiences and just focus on more tangible things we can control. Like seeking truth, doing good, studying scripture, prayer, fasting and developing Christlike attributes. Those experiences with the spirit are not essential, and may not even be necessary for some. The goal of the gospel is not to feel the spirit, it’s to become like our savior. thoughts?

Honestly, this is the vibe I get with most my friends.

This isn’t exactly accurate. Again, the argument is more “you may be killing people because you are refusing to take this safety precaution”. I would compare it to driving at night without headlights. Day to day, it only affects you, but should you get in a car accident, depending on whether you hit another person or a fire hydrant, it may harm someone else.

But this ISNT the argument. The argument is that even though you have the vaccine, there is still a chance to get Covid. So they want everyone to get Covid vaccines for other people protection, not their own. Being around other non vaccinated people increases your chance of contracting it. The question is, should the government mandate individuals do things to prevent those individuals killing others? If forcing everyone to get vaccinated saves 1,100, 1000, 10000, 100000 or 1000000 lives, is it justified? What’s the line? Now I am actually on the same page as everyone. I think it is wrong the mandate this. I’m just curious if we would change our opinion if the disease was more dangerous

So you would be equally angry if they mandated an Ebola vaccine in an Ebola outbreak?

I think the vast majority of people are. It’s the mandate that has people angry

Genuine question for everyone, and don’t read too much into the question. If instead of Covid, it was Ebola and people were vomiting blood in the street and you had first hand experience of multiple people dying of it, would you be down for a vaccine mandate? Assumptions: - vaccine is 90% affective and so the thought process is that it’s not just about your safety, but mass immunity bro minimize spread, even to those who are vaccinated

I’m actually curious to hear this too! You have my permission to post it on the thread

Just found another technique. When someone starts gossiping, ask “why are you telling me this?”

Just an extension of a previous thread. What is the best way to deal with gossip? In this particular situation, the people gossiping are close friends and are truly good people… though are prone to gossip about others, particularly a co-worker struggling with emotional trauma and depression that has, on a few occasions, done some inappropriate things to try and deal with their depression. So far, the only strategies I have found are (1) start saying nice things about the person, (2) try to change the subject, which doesn’t solve the overall problem, and (3) call them out on it and tell them to stop gossiping, which I find leads to everyone denying they are gossiping and starts a battle of who is right and who is wrong.

This has literally no bearing on the topic. We don’t judge because we want people to care, we need to make decisions and can’t do so till we also make judgements.

I think you are exactly right. It just breaks my heart to see them struggle so much and then see my friends talk poorly of them.

Your actually completely wrong. The reason I am asking this is because they care deeply and it is amplifying the depression they are experiencing. On the other end, people don’t want to help because they have done a few inappropriate things on an attempt to deal with their emotions. aim trying to make sense and get a good idea of what the Christlike approach is.

The purpose of the post was not to attribute motive or figure out who is right or wrong. But the actual process of attributing motive and what is the most appropriate process to do so.

So here is where I am currently at with things now. As a principle, I actually don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with attributing impure motive. Those do exist and we need to know this in order to keep ourselves and others safe. And sometimes, if someone is being deliberately manipulative, it is important to know this. Another friend of mine shared a story of a Bishop trying to decide whether to help this person or not with money and food. My friend had recently employed this person at his company the person showed up for training and when he realized there was actual… well… work that needed doing, he said “I need to go grab my keys that I left in my car”, and never came back. My friend shared this with the Bishop and it showed the Bishop that the person was lying about his situation and that he was only looking for handouts. This is a situation where his motives were made more clear and appropriate actions could be made. I think what bothers me the most is how often people (who have no experience with any form of depression) say negative things about my co-worker. Calling them insane, manipulative, making sweeping statements that depression is fake, that they just need to get over it, making fun of the things they says and do, and just complaining about them openly. All doing it with a hostile tone in their voice. I am not convinced that this is in line with what Christ wants of us. We can lose the tone, drop the gossip, use softer wording, and still accomplish the goal of not being taken advantage of and warning others of it too. So I am fine with people thinking my co-worker is manipulative (though I would still argue against it), but there seems to be the sense that it is ok to speak evil of them because we have pegged them as being this bad thing and doing it on purpose. In the gospel setting, the only people Christ cannot be helped by his grace are those that refuse it, rebel and are deliberately doing evil. In a sense, accusing my co-worker of doing this gives us reason to not offer that grace to them. It’s similar to the idea that it is ok to punch Nazi’s, so if we start calling people Nazi’s we can then justify punching them in the face. Couple other thoughts: - There is a difference between a wild horse that deliberately tramples and kills you out of fear and self defense, and a grizzly bear that deliberately kill you because they want to eat you. We are justified in killing a grizzly bear to protect ourselves and others, but are we doing good by killing a scared horse? Treating a person who doesn’t know how to cry out for help appropriately like a conman is going to do great harm. - "It is better, to feed ten impostors than to run the risk of turning away one honest petition” - “When we feel hurt or angry, it is quite easy to judge other people, often assigning dark motives to their actions in order to justify our own feelings of resentment… But when it comes to our own prejudices and grievances, we too often justify our anger as righteous and our judgment as reliable and only appropriate. Though we cannot look into another’s heart, we assume that we know a bad motive or even a bad person when we see one. We make exceptions when it comes to our own bitterness because we feel that, in our case, we have all the information we need to hold someone else in contempt.” - Elder Uchtdorf KEY TAKE AWAYS: - Attributing motives is not evil, but something we must do in order to know how to act in situations. - It is easy to attribute false and negative motives to justify our own anger toward them and avoid doing what is right. - Gossip is never appropriate - We are all beggars and ought to offer the same grace to others we hope to receive from Christ - Treating someone who has innocent or positive motives like they have negative motives can do much unneeded harm

One other issue that I am struggling with his the gossip and complaining. Is it appropriate for person #1 to gossip and complain about the coworker that he sees as being manipulative and attention seeking? Is it appropriate to complain and gossip about anyone no matter how evil they may be? is speaking evil of others appropriate when the one you are speaking of is evil?

What would be the charitable approach if we find that the person is being manipulative? To call them out on it? To just ignore them?

One main issue at hand is ‘when do we decide that our help is doing more harm than good?’. If my friend is being manipulative and simply seeking attention, at what point do I stop offering assistance and what justifies this? Surely it is a judgement of sorts, am I wrong?