Levites as Bishops?

[MIssB]

Yesterday, my husband was telling me about that someone who is a direct descendant of Aaron is entitled to become a Bishop. That is it possible to have someone move into a ward and have the bishopric released and the new person would automatically become bishop. Does this ever happen? I have never heard of this. We couldn't really discuss it any further, but now I'm curious. Additional insights, anyone?

[Guest]

I bet anyone who is or has been a bishop would laugh at the phrasing "entitled to become a bishop".

[MIssB]

I guess that was funny wording. I have never heard of this before, so I was curious!

[Guest]

Yesterday, my husband was telling me about that someone who is a direct descendant of Aaron is entitled to become a Bishop. That is it possible to have someone move into a ward and have the bishopric released and the new person would automatically become bishop. Does this ever happen? I have never heard of this. We couldn't really discuss it any further, but now I'm curious. Additional insights, anyone?

Well, we have a new person that moved into the ward, the RS Presidency got released in a week and she became RS President. I don't see why it couldn't happen for a bishop.

Although, I don't get the "automatically" word you used. Nobody "automatically" becomes bishop, Levite or not - you must have the keys to the Milchezedek Priesthood. But, moving wards doesn't mean you get to lose your Michlezedek Priesthood and whatever qualification you got to hold the office of the bishopric.

Edited April 2, 2012 by anatess

[estradling75]

The relevant scriptures are found in Doctrine and Covenants 68:16 

note verses 20 and 21 about what it takes for them to claim office.

[beefche]

I always thought this was referring to the Presiding Bishop, not necessarily a ward bishop.

[MIssB]

Obviously I don't mean that somebody who didn't hold the Melchizedek priesthood could just waltz in to a meeting house and declare themselves the Bishop... I was referring to this scripture:

D&C 107:15-17

15 The abishopric is the presidency of this priesthood, and holds the bkeys or authority of the same.

16 No man has a legal right to this office, to hold the keys of this priesthood, except he be a aliteral descendant of bAaron.

17 But as a high priest of the aMelchizedek Priesthood has authority to officiate in all the lesser offices, he may officiate in the office of bbishop when no literal descendant of Aaron can be found, provided he is called and cset apart and ordained unto this power by the hands of the dPresidency of the Melchizedek Priesthood.

Maybe I misunderstood what my husband was saying or maybe he is wrong. Just trying to find out if anyone had more information about this subject...

[MarginOfError]

I think I would want Ram's expertise, but the last explanation I heard was that a qualified and worth Levite doesn't need to be ordained a High Priest in the Melchizedek Priesthood to act as bishop. However, he still must be called of God and sustained before taking office.

Also, you're not likely to see this happen. Even if a person is a direct descendant of Aaron (and can prove it), the Church's practice is to ordain that person to the higher priesthood when they are mature and worthy. The Levite would probably be a Melchizedek Priesthood holder long before he was recommended for the office of bishop.

[Suzie]

but the last explanation I heard was that a qualified and worth Levite doesn't need to be ordained a High Priest in the Melchizedek Priesthood to act as bishop.

And he doesn't need counselors. Well yes, maybe he "needs" them but he can be a Bishop without counselors.

[MarginOfError]

And he doesn't need counselors. Well yes, maybe he "needs" them but he can be a Bishop without counselors.

Meh, so can any bishop. I know because my dad was bishop without counselors for over a year at one point. I think that was his idea of fun.

[MarginOfError]

I bet anyone who is or has been a bishop would laugh at the phrasing "entitled to become a bishop".

The better phrasing would be "privileged to become bishop."

[Suzie]

Meh, so can any bishop. I know because my dad was bishop without counselors for over a year at one point. I think that was his idea of fun.

Was he called as a Bishop without counselors or during the time he was serving because of different circumstances he didn't have any counselors?

[MarginOfError]

Was he called as a Bishop without counselors or during the time he was serving because of different circumstances he didn't have any counselors?

It was while he was serving. Both of his counselors moved out of the area and they never got around to calling new counselors.

[Vort]

I think I would want Ram's expertise, but the last explanation I heard was that a qualified and worth Levite doesn't need to be ordained a High Priest in the Melchizedek Priesthood to act as bishop. However, he still must be called of God and sustained before taking office.

He does not need to be a high priest to act as bishop, but he most certainly does need to be a high priest to act as the ward's presiding high priest -- a position that is always held by the bishop.

It seems to me that the only way a literal descendant of Aaron could be a bishop without being a high priest is if the stake presidency, probably under the direction of or at least with the approval of the First Presidency, separated in that ward the duties of the bishop (president of the Aaronic Priesthood in the ward, responsible for tithing and the temporal needs of the Saints) from the duties of the ward president or presiding high priest (spiritual oversight of all members of the ward, responsible for determining worthiness of individual members). As I have never heard of such a thing being done, my assumption is that it has not been done.

[MarginOfError]

He does not need to be a high priest to act as bishop, but he most certainly does need to be a high priest to act as the ward's presiding high priest -- a position that is always held by the bishop.

It seems to me that the only way a literal descendant of Aaron could be a bishop without being a high priest is if the stake presidency, probably under the direction of or at least with the approval of the First Presidency, separated in that ward the duties of the bishop (president of the Aaronic Priesthood in the ward, responsible for tithing and the temporal needs of the Saints) from the duties of the ward president or presiding high priest (spiritual oversight of all members of the ward, responsible for determining worthiness of individual members). As I have never heard of such a thing being done, my assumption is that it has not been done.

Very good points.

Just on an absurdly nit picking level, before we could rule out separating the the responsibilities of the bishop from the responsibilities of the presiding high priest, we would need to know if a Levite had ever been called as bishop. I don't know why I'm bringing this up really. You know what...nevermind. Just imagine an LOL cat here instead.

[john doe]

My understanding is that, while a Levite may be entitled to be called a bishop, he would need to be assigned to a flock to be called the bishop of a ward, which may or may not happen depending on circumstances. A man still must be 'called of God' to serve in the church. So, yes, while he may be 'A' bishop, he wouldn't necessarily be 'The' bishop.

[Blackmarch]

Yesterday, my husband was telling me about that someone who is a direct descendant of Aaron is entitled to become a Bishop. That is it possible to have someone move into a ward and have the bishopric released and the new person would automatically become bishop. Does this ever happen? I have never heard of this. We couldn't really discuss it any further, but now I'm curious. Additional insights, anyone?

he still has to have been baptised, have the priesthood and be worthy of it. I think its more of a right to, not necessarily entitled. And i have never heard of anyone coming forth to claim this, so i doubt anything regarding this occurs if ever. Edited April 3, 2012 by Blackmarch

[Bensalem]

I'm a bit curious too. As I understand, the Jewish faith recognizes only the Cohen sir name to be the lineage of the Levite priesthood.

How could anyone prove their lineage outside of that perimeter?

[Vort]

My understanding is that, while a Levite may be entitled to be called a bishop

Point of clarification, which others have hinted at:

In my understanding, a literal descendent of Aaron (which is a subset of Levites) does not have the right to be called as bishop. Rather, if he is called as bishop, he was the right to serve as bishop without counselors.

[Blackmarch]

deleted

Edited April 3, 2012 by Blackmarch

[rameumptom]

The Church policy is, if a person can prove they are a direct descendant of Aaron (not just a Levite) can be a bishop without holding the Melchizedek Priesthood. However, he is still under the requirement to be called of God to that position by the Prophet. Just because a person has met one criteria does not mean he has met all criteria, such as worthiness. That being said, it is very likely that a descendant of Aaron that was called would also be ordained to the MP, so that he could have full access to the blessings of the temple. He would not be able to do temple interviews for endowments or sealings without the MP. He could not direct the priesthood in ordaining MP, confirmations of the Holy Ghost, or a variety of other things. He basically would have one hand tied behind his back, or those responsibilities would have to be delegated to the high priest group leader or elder's quorum president.

[Just_A_Guy]

He does not need to be a high priest to act as bishop, but he most certainly does need to be a high priest to act as the ward's presiding high priest -- a position that is always held by the bishop.

It seems to me that the only way a literal descendant of Aaron could be a bishop without being a high priest is if the stake presidency, probably under the direction of or at least with the approval of the First Presidency, separated in that ward the duties of the bishop (president of the Aaronic Priesthood in the ward, responsible for tithing and the temporal needs of the Saints) from the duties of the ward president or presiding high priest (spiritual oversight of all members of the ward, responsible for determining worthiness of individual members). As I have never heard of such a thing being done, my assumption is that it has not been done.

Someone help me out here. Is a bishop really a ward's presiding high priest? I thought that the stake president was the stake's presiding high priest, but that his inherent jurisdiction was directly over the various ward HP group leaders and elders' quorum presidents. My understanding was that whatever authority the bishop holds over MP holders in his ward comes via delegation from the stake president, and not because he is a "presiding high priest" in his own right.

[MarginOfError]

Someone help me out here. Is a bishop really a ward's presiding high priest? I thought that the stake president was the stake's presiding high priest, but that his inherent jurisdiction was directly over the various ward HP group leaders and elders' quorum presidents. My understanding was that whatever authority the bishop holds over MP holders in his ward comes via delegation from the stake president, and not because he is a "presiding high priest" in his own right.

You essentially have it right.

The stake president is the president of the stake high priests quorum.

The bishop is the presiding high priest in the ward.

The high priests group leader is the acting leader of the the ward's group of the stake high priest quorum

[Vort]

Someone help me out here. Is a bishop really a ward's presiding high priest? I thought that the stake president was the stake's presiding high priest, but that his inherent jurisdiction was directly over the various ward HP group leaders and elders' quorum presidents. My understanding was that whatever authority the bishop holds over MP holders in his ward comes via delegation from the stake president, and not because he is a "presiding high priest" in his own right.

Bishops hold keys of leadership, as do elders quorum presidents (but not high priest group leaders). I assume those keys are not merely Aaronic Priesthood keys of leadership, though never having been a bishop, I do not know for sure. If this is so, then a bishop does not derive his authority merely from assignment of the stake president, but possesses those keys of leadership, similar to the elders quorum president. (Of course, he exercises those keys only under the direction of the stake president -- again, like the EQP.)

It is beyond dispute that the bishop directs and coordinates the Priesthood efforts in the ward, and thus must of necessity be a high priest. The only way this could be otherwise is if the Aaronic Priesthood duties of a "bishop" were separated from the Melchizedek Priesthood duties.

I feel confident that a bishop receives Melchizedek Priesthood keys of leadership -- though again, I don't know this to be the case, as I have never been a bishop or witnessed an ordination. Nevertheless, even if we assume this *not* to be the case, I still maintain that "ward presiding high priest" is the appropriate description for the bishop. He functions as the ward president as much as or more than the Sunday School president "presides" over the Sunday School, or any other auxiliary "president".

[Palerider]

A few years ago my Stake President and I were talking about this very thing. Reason for this was, I needed to new Councilors and it went from there. He stated that a descendant of Aaron would still need to be called. His point was if the Bishop was going to be released and someone else was going to be called to take his place it would not automatically be this descendant of Aaron. I went away thinking he would have to be inspired to call this person just like any other Bishop.