Stake President Won't Even Interview Me, Aren't I Allowed Personal Revelation?


bethreilley
 Share

Recommended Posts

I mean this all with the most respect possible. I have had very strong promptings since I was 18 that I needed to be going to the temple and receive my endowments. My bishop was brought to tears, having felt the confirming feeling of the spirit. He knows that I would not have made this request to go if I had not indeed been prompted to. When I was 18, the stake president said he wouldn't even talk to me until my 19th birthday. After turning 19, I'd become a little gun shy about the whole thing, and even shoved it aside from my mind, figuring I had just misinterpreted inspiration and feeling the heat of embarrassment. It wasn't until after conference that I had decided to pray about it again. I was overwhelmed by the love behind the confirmation. 

My bishopric, the lot of them, all feel quite strongly that I need to be there, and they are cheering me on. The stake president has yet to call me or accept an appointment though. My question has multiple parts; The first, if I truly hadn't been ready to enter the temple, the bishop would have suggested I wait or work on something first. But he didn't. He knows that now is my time, and he has had many meetings pleading for my sake with the SP. Shouldn't the bishop's call hold some weight with the SP? Second, shouldn't he at LEAST allow me the opportunity to be interviewed? He has never met me, never spoken a word to me. At this point, he isn't denying me based on readiness or worthiness, but my age exclusively. I understand fully that the temple is a very sacred place, where sacred and very serious covenants are entered. I would never want to rush it or jump in before I was ready. And I have prayed and fasted and agonized over this prompting, time and time again. I have dug my heels into the ground, reasoning why I shouldn't go there and explaining to myself how I must be mistaken. But the answer is clear. I know it, the bishop knows it, my close friends can see it, and most importantly, Heavenly Father knows that now I am ready. 

Does anyone have any advice on this at all, similar experiences, words of comfort? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consider for a moment that when God sets us on a path... we assume that he intends for us to take the direct path and therefore he will open it for us...  However often we seem to take two steps forward only to be driven back by things out of our control.  This is not an accident nor is it a sign that we misunderstood... but more then likely its a test/trial to see just how faithful, and willing to follow... even when it is not easy...  @NeuroTypical has correctly Identified the kind of action we all need to take when we face such things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I have advice.  Be patient, forgive your SP's slowness to action, and counsel with your bishop in the same way you're doing here with us.

But what if the bishop doesn't own a cattle prod?

I mean, really, stake leadership is constantly harping on the number of members without TRs, and here we have someone trying to get one who's being stonewalled by an SP who won't even take the time to say why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bethreilley said:

The stake president has yet to call me or accept an appointment though.

Quick question.  Have you called the Stake Executive Secretary to set up an appointment?  The way the Church generally functions is members set up appointments with either the Bishop or the Stake President by contacting their respective secretary.  Unless the Bishop/Stake President either a) knows of a problem or b) has a calling for you they very rarely go out of their way to call you into their office for a chat. 

They are both generally very busy individual who are managing church affairs, on top of business and family affairs-I wouldn't be so quick to assume he doesn't want to talk with you.

Generally speaking one contacts the Bishop who then give the go ahead to speak with the SP (it doesn't always work like that, but if one hasn't talked with the Bishop prior to talking with the SP, prob. one of the 1st questions the SP is going to ask is "have you talked with your Bishop about this?".  If the answer is no, or well a long time ago-there had better be a really good reason as to why you should be talking with the SP vs. the Bishop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To further clarify: The first time I sat down with my bishop about this, he did advise me not to make an appointment with him until he had had a chance to talk to him first and the Stake President said to him these words exactly, "I will not have her in my office until her 19th birthday". 

After my most recent sit down with him, he told me as well as my other friend who is pursuing her endowments as a 24 year old, to wait for a phone call. After not receiving a phone call I talked with my bishop again and later that day he had a meeting with the SP and told me he'd be vouching for me and pleading my case. 

The bishop HAS told me before that my odds with this SP of getting my TR would be very small. But he would not have fought for it if he didn't believe that I was ready. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@bethreilley,

This must seem terribly frustrating to you.  And I give you my sympathies.  I am reminded of so many instances in scriptures & church history where someone is prompted to do something, but has roadblocks given to them to overcome.  Most of the time, it is clear that the roadblocks are from Satan.  But have you considered that sometimes the roadblocks are from the Lord?  

Joseph Smith was chosen to be the Lord's mouthpiece.  He was told that he would be translating a sacred record.  This was what he was foreordained to do.  But when he met Moroni at Cumorah, Moroni forbade him from taking the plates.  Later, his gift of translation was taken away from him by the Lord.  Eventually all was provided and all was well in the end.  Joseph did fulfill his mission.

Some say that he had to deal with worthiness issues because of the reasons given for why he was not allowed to proceed with the mission he'd been called to do.  I see it more as preparation.  What did he need to do?  Nothing really.  He just needed to experience the longing.  He needed to fully appreciate how important the Book of Mormon was.  And he eventually did.  How many times do we hear that we are not given more because of how lightly we take that which we've been given?  

Perhaps, it is not your worthiness.  Perhaps it is not that you can't take it.  Perhaps it is that the Lord has something special in mind for you and it requires that you learn just how important some things in the gospel are.  So important that He wants you to long for it; to yearn for it; to fully develop an overpowering desire for it.  Then when you finally go, how much more are you going to appreciate it?

This may be a personal test for you.  Are you going to find great importance in the endowment?  Or are you going to come out of the temple and say,"I waited several years for this?!?"

One thing I can promise you is this: As long as you keep trying to do what you truly believe the Lord wants you to do, you will be right with him.  Just keep praying to know that you are on the right path and learn to depend on the arm of the Lord rather than the arm of flesh. It is not about the destination.  It's about the journey.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bethreilley said:

To further clarify: The first time I sat down with my bishop about this, he did advise me not to make an appointment with him until he had had a chance to talk to him first and the Stake President said to him these words exactly, "I will not have her in my office until her 19th birthday". 

After my most recent sit down with him, he told me as well as my other friend who is pursuing her endowments as a 24 year old, to wait for a phone call. After not receiving a phone call I talked with my bishop again and later that day he had a meeting with the SP and told me he'd be vouching for me and pleading my case. 

The bishop HAS told me before that my odds with this SP of getting my TR would be very small. But he would not have fought for it if he didn't believe that I was ready. 

Your post are enlightening... but maybe not in the way you hoped...

The scriptures tell us that as we draw near unto Christ he will show unto us our weaknesses.

You have been following the prompting of the spirit and drawing near unto Christ and this is awesome... but totally as predicted a weakness has shown up.

One of the temple recommend interview questions is "Do you sustain Local Church leaders"  If you have already gone through the interview with your Bishop then you answered "Yes" to this question.

Unfortunately some members of the church answer this without fully understanding what it means.  Then they encounter a Church Leader that they don't agree with, and/or the leader do something the members think is not right.  And then we find that their "Yes" to sustaining Local Church Leaders was more lip service then reality.  That when it really and truly mattered their willingness to sustain their Local Church Leaders went up in a puff of smoke.

Your posts here show that you are struggling with this idea, because your Stake President is doing something you think is not right.  A weakness of yours has been shown unto you.  There is nothing wrong with this, but now you have a choice to make.  Are you going to work on this weakness the Lord has revealed to you? 

The ability to sustain church leaders is pretty foundational to being Temple Worthy.  If you can't do it then you aren't worthy to enter the temple no matter what words you might utter to the Bishop.

The Lord has shown unto you a weakness... Are you willing to work on that weakness?  Are you willing to exercise faith, patience, humility, long suffering and charity, as you deal with a man whom by Article of Faith is "called of God, by prophesy and by the laying on of hands by those in authority" while still being human and having human weaknesses?

 

Edited by estradling75
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, estradling75 said:

One of the temple recommend interview questions is "Do you sustain Local Church leaders"  If you have already gone through the interview with your Bishop then you answered "Yes" to this question.

"Sustain" doesn't mean "slavishly regard as infallible."  Or do you believe Michael Wayne Coleman was led by the Spirit to solicit inappropriate contact with teenage boys because it was necessary?  Should the members of his ward have been required to hand in their TRs for finding his actions repulsive?

The whole reason there is a chain of command is because people screw up from time to time.  If they didn't, we'd just have a Prophet and bishops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, NightSG said:

"Sustain" doesn't mean "slavishly regard as infallible."

What part of "Are you willing to exercise faith, patience, humility, long suffering and charity, as you deal with a man whom by Article of Faith is "called of God, by prophesy and by the laying on of hands by those in authority" while still being human and having human weaknesses?"  says "Slavish regard as infallible"?

The Stake President being unwilling to meet with her is an issue that she does not have the power to solve...  She can get all frustrated by something she can't control... or she can work on the things she can while having Faith that the Lord will solve the issue that she can't in his time and in his way.

 

Edited by estradling75
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, NightSG said:

"Sustain" doesn't mean "slavishly regard as infallible."  Or do you believe Michael Wayne Coleman was led by the Spirit to solicit inappropriate contact with teenage boys because it was necessary?  Should the members of his ward have been required to hand in their TRs for finding his actions repulsive?

The whole reason there is a chain of command is because people screw up from time to time.  If they didn't, we'd just have a Prophet and bishops.

Wow you are way off the reservation....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

The Stake President being unwilling to meet with her is an issue that she does not have the power to solve...  She can get all frustrated by something she can't control... or she can work on the things she can while having Faith that the Lord will solve the issue that she can't in his time and in his way.

 

Do we know that the Stake president is unwilling to meet with her or do we just suspect it? There are plenty of ex bishops and others who have held leadership positions or currently do on this forum. The Stake President is very, very busy. 

OP if you want it from the horse's mouth call his executive secretary and make an appointment. Do not sit around and wait for something to happen or speculate on why he is not meeting with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a person who believes church leaders are infallible, because only Christ is.  You can sustain and support a church leader while simultaneously acknowledging their shortcomings.  Here's my observations thus far:

1) @bethreilley has this prompting and it's from God and super important.  I do not know if that means it has to be fulfilled right now or later.

2) Right now the SP is being unrelenting on the issue.  I do not know if that is due to a prompting from God or his own stubbornness.  I do not know if he will change.  I don't think any of us can know this.

3) The bishop is going to talk to the SP about this.  Cool, though I know from personal experience this can sometimes take a few months (I was also a special case going to the temple)

4) Regardless of when @bethreilley gets to take her endowments out, it'll be a marvelous experience.  That I do know with absolute certainty. 

Edited by Jane_Doe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Do we know that the Stake president is unwilling to meet with her or do we just suspect it? There are plenty of ex bishops and others who have held leadership positions or currently do on this forum. The Stake President is very, very busy.

We only know what the OP has told us...  It sounds unusual but its kind of hard not to take what she said was a direct quote of her bishop at face value

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, estradling75 said:

Then they encounter a Church Leader that they don't agree with, and/or the leader do something the members think is not right.  And then we find that their "Yes" to sustaining Local Church Leaders was more lip service then reality.  That when it really and truly mattered their willingness to sustain their Local Church Leaders went up in a puff of smoke.

Your posts here show that you are struggling with this idea, because your Stake President is doing something you think is not right.  A weakness of yours has been shown unto you.  There is nothing wrong with this, but now you have a choice to make.  Are you going to work on this weakness the Lord has revealed to you? 

 

40 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

What part of "Are you willing to exercise faith, patience, humility, long suffering and charity, as you deal with a man whom by Article of Faith is "called of God, by prophesy and by the laying on of hands by those in authority" while still being human and having human weaknesses?"  says "Slavish regard as infallible"?

What part of your previous post isn't accusing the OP of not sustaining the SP because she dares to disagree with him?

29 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Do we know that the Stake president is unwilling to meet with her or do we just suspect it? There are plenty of ex bishops and others who have held leadership positions or currently do on this forum. The Stake President is very, very busy. 

Busy doing what that's so much more important than allowing the members of his stake to do what is commanded of them?  I'm certain my SP is much busier than average, since most of the wards in this stake are bigger than many stakes.  Still, the priority has always been Priesthood and TR interviews, because both of those allow the individual members to advance as commanded.

31 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

1) @bethreilley has this prompting and it's from God and super important.  I do not know if that means it has to be fulfilled right now or later.

Who gets a prompting to put something on the calendar for a couple of years from now?  Aren't we supposed to follow the counsel of the Spirit eagerly and promptly?  (Heck, maybe that's why they call them "promptings" instead of "procrastinatings.")

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, NightSG said:

 

What part of your previous post isn't accusing the OP of not sustaining the SP because she dares to disagree with him?

 

 

Wow... total reading comprehension fail...

You clearly have no clue what it means to sustain leaders...

Its not about giving them a pass on failure of Moral Character or slavishly regard as infallible like you demand that it does.

Its about recognizing that Leaders are Humans, and Called, and sometimes struggle to balance the two. That we need to exercise Christ-like attributes and support toward them as much as we demand and require that they exercise Christ-like attributes and support toward us when we mess up.

 

Edited by estradling75
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, NightSG said:

Busy doing what that's so much more important than allowing the members of his stake to do what is commanded of them?  I'm certain my SP is much busier than average, since most of the wards in this stake are bigger than many stakes.  Still, the priority has always been Priesthood and TR interviews, because both of those allow the individual members to advance as commanded.

 

Are you accusing the Stake president of being derelict in his duties?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, NightSG said:

Who gets a prompting to put something on the calendar for a couple of years from now?  Aren't we supposed to follow the counsel of the Spirit eagerly and promptly?  (Heck, maybe that's why they call them "promptings" instead of "procrastinatings.")

 

Me and lots of other people.  Somethings are long term plans (marriage, job, formal education, etc).  For example, this week myself and God have been having very in depth conversations lately about my post-graduation life and direction.  These things are still many years down the road, but conviction and prayer are happening today in preparation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

Me and lots of other people.  Somethings are long term plans (marriage, job, formal education, etc).  For example, this week myself and God have been having very in depth conversations lately about my post-graduation life and direction.  These things are still many years down the road, but conviction and prayer are happening today in preparation. 

In addition to that...  The Lord also might prompt a person to do something, but not for the reason that the person assumes that they are being prompted for.  While it is faithfulness to act on a prompting to the best of ones ability...  It is pride to assume we know all the ramification of what we do and what demand that our expectations be met.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OP

Go to your bishop.  Have a temple recommend interview.  If you pass the interview, he will give you a signed recommend which you will then need to present when you have your temple recommend interview with the stake president.

After your interview with the bishop, call the stake executive secretary, and set an appointment with the stake president for a temple recommend interview.  

If you haven't done the above, then you've got nothing and no reason to complain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mdfxdb said:

Go to your bishop.  Have a temple recommend interview.  If you pass the interview, he will give you a signed recommend which you will then need to present when you have your temple recommend interview with the stake president.

Since pretty much every post so far has mentioned that the bishop is already involved, don't you think he might be aware of the TR process, and would have already taken care of his part before:

12 hours ago, bethreilley said:

To further clarify: The first time I sat down with my bishop about this, he did advise me not to make an appointment with him until he had had a chance to talk to him first and the Stake President said to him these words exactly, "I will not have her in my office until her 19th birthday". 

(So we can already see that the SP doesn't think much of the Handbook's specific instruction not to use age as a criterion for readiness to attend the temple.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't had a direct personal conversation about this issue with whichever individuals I know for certain are responsible for the decision.  But I give it as my testimony, beyond a shadow of a doubt, with every. fiber. of. my. being, that I know the stake president is unthinking, unfeeling, unknowing, unaware, uninspired, and--above all--unquestionably in the wrong.

It's the unwritten order of things. 

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NightSG said:

Since pretty much every post so far has mentioned that the bishop is already involved, don't you think he might be aware of the TR process, and would have already taken care of his part before:

(So we can already see that the SP doesn't think much of the Handbook's specific instruction not to use age as a criterion for readiness to attend the temple.)

He may be involved, but the OP never stated she had a signed recommend in hand.

Unless the OP has officially made an appointment with the Stake President Executive Secretary (with recommend signed by Bishop), and been rejected by the Stake President, then there is no argument.  Only hearsay, and speculation.  

If the above has truly occurred without explanation, then the OP may (and I stress the may part) think about counseling with an area authority on the matter.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NightSG said:

Since pretty much every post so far has mentioned that the bishop is already involved, don't you think he might be aware of the TR process, and would have already taken care of his part before:

(So we can already see that the SP doesn't think much of the Handbook's specific instruction not to use age as a criterion for readiness to attend the temple.)

He may be involved, but the OP never stated she had a signed recommend in hand.

Unless the OP has officially made an appointment with the Stake President Executive Secretary (with recommend signed by Bishop), and been rejected by the Stake President, then there is no argument.  Only hearsay, and speculation.  

If the above has truly occurred without explanation, then the OP may have a case against the Stake President. 

Edited by mdfxdb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share