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

[pam]

4 hours 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?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.

 

You talk as if a Stake President has nothing else to do but be a Stake President.  They also have families and jobs and community responsibilities.  They have a couple of nights a week and Sundays to take care of a myriad of things that are required in their calling.  

I, for one, would like to see less bashing of our leaders here on this site.  

[Maureen]

7 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

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. 

No one has replied to this post. Is this one of those posts that is meant to be funny or sarcastic and all the LDS recognize that while us non's are in the dark?

M.

[pam]

28 minutes ago, Maureen said:

No one has replied to this post. Is this one of those posts that is meant to be funny or sarcastic and all the LDS recognize that while us non's are in the dark?

M.

I meant to and I got distracted.  I was very confused by it.

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, Maureen said:

No one has replied to this post. Is this one of those posts that is meant to be funny or sarcastic and all the LDS recognize that while us non's are in the dark?

M.

Sarcasm fail. ?  We are so quick to bear testimony of unverifiable things that appeal to us, yet so quick to reject other unverifiable things merely because we personally find them disturbing to our worldview.

Mormons immediately assuming that their ecclesiastical leaders not immediately giving them what they want constitutes leadership error--or Mormons trying to out-lawyer their leaders--is a pet peeve of mine.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Maureen said:

No one has replied to this post. Is this one of those posts that is meant to be funny or sarcastic and all the LDS recognize that while us non's are in the dark?

M.

Wow!  I totally missed @Just_A_Guy's post.  I've gone back and "liked" it now.

Yes, it was supposed to be sarcastic.  No, you were not meant to be left in the dark.  It wasn't just a Mormon joke.  You obviously picked up on something or else you wouldn't have commented on it as you had.  You didn't find it funny because you're more sympathetic to the OP than JAG was.  And the fact that you don't believe our leaders have any special motives or mantles or authority than anyone else would have you missing on some of the nuance.

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

Wow!  I totally missed @Just_A_Guy's post.  I've gone back and "liked" it now.

I have the weirdest feeling that I just got pity-liked.

Edited October 12, 2016 by Just_A_Guy

[estradling75]

8 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

 

Mormons immediately assuming that their ecclesiastical leaders not immediately giving them what they want constitutes leadership error--or Mormons trying to out-lawyer their leaders--is a pet peeve of mine.

Indeed... it is a irritation of mine as well...  These same people would also protest most loudly, about how unfair, unjust, unChrist-like we were being if we attacked their actions/inactions with the same level of venom.   Yet for some reason they think the Golden rule does not apply if the person is a leader of the Church and that it is perfectly ok to do unto others what they would NOT want done unto them.

Back to the OP the Bishop and Stake President both have the responsibly to make sure those going to the temple are worthy and ready.  Generally speaking those going at or around age 19 (or earlier) are those that have made a mature commitment (even if they are still not fully mature themselves) of serving a mission (or in rare cases a marriage sealed in the temple)  They aren't people just sitting around saying I feel the spirit... they are people actively working to do the various things commanded.

The OP has not talked about being Sealed or Mission... so we have no clue where they are on either of those.

But it is not beyond the bounds of reason for a Stake President to want see some kind of active progress forward before giving a recommend.  Saying be 19 while unusual is basically saying lets keep her at the same levels as Sisters who have put in their papers and committed to a mission (or committed to temple marriage) That is a awesome peer group to be in from a spiritual and commitment to the Gospel perspective.  It can only be seen as a punishment or punitive from the mindset of "I want it... So it is owed to me and you must give it to me right now" perspective.

 

[Anddenex]

On 10/10/2016 at 2:38 PM, bethreilley said:

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?

The answer to your first question encompasses a yes and no answer. The answer is "yes" because the bishop may indeed feel some time may be warranted to better prepare for entering the temple and will then encourage you to keep your desire while being patient in receiving the ordinances. The answer is "no" because the bishop may not feel one way or the other, and because the desire is good the bishop will then encourage you to pursue your desire to enter the temple. The bishop encouraging you to do something good doesn't mean he has had any spiritual prompting, unless he has specifically said to you, "I have received a spiritual prompting."

On 10/10/2016 at 2:38 PM, bethreilley said:

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?

This question encompasses "stewardship." The stake president is the president of the High Priest and has been given keys, right, privileges, and authority to act in his calling according to the spirit of the Lord which is in him. The stake president is over all wards in his stake, which is why when he visits he presides, and the bishop acts directly under him; although the bishop presides over the ward. This priesthood line of authority, rights, privileges, and keys are exemplified through out the leadership of the Church. Let's ask a similar question, "Does the stake president's decision hold any weight when he speaks with the area authority (GA)? The answer is "yes", the stake president holds weight according to his calling, and nothing more. The area authority holds the rights, privileges, and keys to act in his calling as bestowed to him by those who hold the right keys to act in their office before the Lord. The bishop's calling holds weight when it pertains to the ward. If the bishop brings something to the stake president that is within the stewardship of the stake president, and no longer within the stewardship of the bishop, then the stake president is the final decision maker. This is seen at the ward level also within ward councils. The councils provide a great avenue for additional insight and when all thoughts are brought before the bishop the bishop will make a decision, and some people may not like the decision.

I will provide a personal example of stewardship and weight that I once experienced with our bishop. The other counselor and I were recommending, strongly recommending, an individual to serve in a specific calling. With each attempt, this spanned for two months, the bishop specified he did not feel good about this. Our words had weight, the bishop thought, but he never received any form of confirmation -- only confusion -- when his name was presented by myself and the other counselor. The other counselor then recommended a different calling and the bishop then said, "I like that; that feels good. Let's move forward with this." The next Sunday the individual was extended a calling (please note, the counselor and myself were disappointed because we felt so strongly he would have been great in the other position, and he would have been) and the individual then said these words, "Oh thank you, thank you. I have been praying of the past two months that I would be called to serve with my wife in primary. God answers prayers!" Imagine if through our constant persuasion to get the bishop to see our way, the testimony of an answered prayer would not have occurred and that would have been a blessing lost due to the counselor's and mine selfish interest, although we felt we were doing good. The bishop holds a mantle, a priesthood mantle, as does the stake president within their sphere of influence as given by the Lord through priesthood keys. Be very cautious to mock, disregard, or create contention when a bishop or stake president is doing their best to act in their calling before the Lord. I could provide other experiences, but this will suffice, as this is one of the devil's playgrounds (mocking, stone throwing (figuratively) the Lord's servants) because it is one of the most important aspects of our faith, "The Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood." How we respond to our leaders is very important to our readiness to receive further light and knowledge, even if we may not agree.

On 10/10/2016 at 2:38 PM, bethreilley said:

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.

Yes, as other have mentioned call the secretary and request an appointment with your stake president. The last statement is an assumption. You have specified you have never met with him. You have only received a secondary witness and probably have not received the whole conversation between the bishop and your stake president. The stake president, due to his stewardship, has the right to receive personal revelation according to these events. 

 

On 10/10/2016 at 2:38 PM, bethreilley said:

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? 

Wonderful, now be patient, continue to exercise faith and allow the Lord to teach you through this process. If Heavenly Father knows it, then he will reveal it to his servant also. Respect the stake presidents stewardship. Honor the Lord by continuing to act upon the prompting you have received. Be patient as you continue to act because the reward of your temple blessing will eventually come, in the Lord's time table.

We wish you the best.

Edited October 21, 2016 by Anddenex
was to once

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

On October 11, 2016 at 5:14 AM, Carborendum said:

@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.

I realize I'm late the the conversation, but I just wanted to say:  Carb, I thought this whole post was a marvelous answer.  I have nothing to add to that.  

On October 11, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Jane_Doe said:

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.

Amen to that!   

Apologies to the OP, I understand your frustration (I had a similar sort of experience when I was your age, only it was my uncle who nixed it.  My mom was not active, so she asked my uncle his thoughts, and though he hardly knew me, he was against it and that was that.  Stupid.)  Still...I think that part of supporting and sustaining your leaders means that you work this out privately with them and the Lord and not complain about it publicly.  

When I am frustrated with someone in my ward, there is a temptation to complain to someone else, but I check myself.  These are things we should resolve in the proper manner.  

[unixknight]

On 10/11/2016 at 2:57 AM, 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. 

I know you feel frustrated and conflicted.  The Bishop seems to have had the same revelation as you and it's hard to see how the Stake Prez would get a different revelation... so one way to mentally resolve that conflict is to conclude that maybe the Stake Prez hasn't taken the time to pray about it or receive the revelation that surely must agree with the Bishop's and yours.  I'm sure I'd feel the same way. 

At the end of the day, the Stake Prez "outranks" a Bishop and may well know things the Bishop doesn't.  The Bishop isn't somehow more enlightened or more reasonable just because he feels the same as you.  I'm in agreement with those who are saying this might be some sort of test, one which it doesn't look to me like you're doing to well on, no offense.  Can you take "no" for an answer from those in authority, or will you waver in your trust because they make decisions that you weren't anticipating?

Ultimately, your end game is still the same.  You're less than a year from being 19.  I'd recommend spending that time spiritually preparing for your first Temple visit, and when you do have that meeting with the Stake Prez, just ask him about this, and see what he says.  I bet he can clarify things once you sit down with him.

[NightSG]

5 hours ago, unixknight said:

Can you take "no" for an answer from those in authority, or will you waver in your trust because they make decisions that you weren't anticipating?

I trust my self defense instructors.  That doesn't mean I don't check the chamber of a (usually simulated) handgun before we use it, or test the edge of a (usually rubber) knife.  If he handed me a weapon I wasn't familiar with enough to verify its status, I would insist on having it explained such that I could confirm to my satisfaction the exact degree of "safe" (getting pistol whipped with a fake gun will still cause injury, as will a rubber knife in the eye) that it is.  Beyond that, I have to trust that they won't kill or seriously injure me without a weapon; at least three of them are certainly capable of overcoming my best efforts.

And yet, the consequences of an unsuccessful disarm against a real, loaded gun would be over in an instant.  (At least for the one trying to disarm.)  If someone is expecting me to accept a decision that may have eternal consequences for me, I would certainly expect some explanation from that person, regardless of whether he's an 8th degree black belt who was teaching before I discovered girls and has a significant interest in not having the local headlines be about a death in his dojo, or a SP with maybe a couple years experience who may or may not even be asking the Spirit for the answer he's giving.

[Maureen]

6 hours ago, unixknight said:

...Ultimately, your end game is still the same.  You're less than a year from being 19....

Quote

bethreilley said:

...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...

The OP has already mentioned that she is 19 years old.

M.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Maureen

[estradling75]

2 hours ago, NightSG said:

I trust my self defense instructors.  That doesn't mean I don't check the chamber of a (usually simulated) handgun before we use it, or test the edge of a (usually rubber) knife.  If he handed me a weapon I wasn't familiar with enough to verify its status, I would insist on having it explained such that I could confirm to my satisfaction the exact degree of "safe" (getting pistol whipped with a fake gun will still cause injury, as will a rubber knife in the eye) that it is.  Beyond that, I have to trust that they won't kill or seriously injure me without a weapon; at least three of them are certainly capable of overcoming my best efforts.

And yet, the consequences of an unsuccessful disarm against a real, loaded gun would be over in an instant.  (At least for the one trying to disarm.)  If someone is expecting me to accept a decision that may have eternal consequences for me, I would certainly expect some explanation from that person, regardless of whether he's an 8th degree black belt who was teaching before I discovered girls and has a significant interest in not having the local headlines be about a death in his dojo, or a SP with maybe a couple years experience who may or may not even be asking the Spirit for the answer he's giving.

Which example has absolutely nothing in common which the situation the OP is in.  Neither her life, or her spiritually is threatened by being told to wait.

The only danger, the only threat, she faces would be of her own making by deciding to do things her own way. 

Maybe the Stake President following revelation precisely or maybe he is off in reality of his own ego...  We can not know nor tell... Either way for the OP it does not matter... the Lord only holds us accountable for the things we can control. The Stake President actions falls in to the category of 'can not control' so her requirement is to hold herself ready for when the Lord opens the door for her.  Her only danger is if she does not do so.

[Guest MormonGator]

5 hours ago, NightSG said:

I trust my self defense instructors.  

You and I have had greatly different self defense instructors throughout the years. I've had some good, and some are egomaniacal lunatics that make me look humble and well adjusted. They'll give out legal advice "Oh, you can defend yourself like this..." when they have absolutely no idea about the law. Self defense law is very technical, for the record and they aren't lawyers. 

 Or, they'll outright lie and put their students in what might be mortal danger. "Use this technique when someone has a gun pulled on you." Um, no. When someone has a gun pulled on you, the best idea isn't to fight back, no matter what martial arts technique you've learned tough guy. Or they'll say "You have to get your hands registered as lethal weapons." No you don't. 

Don't get me started on whack job marital arts self defense instructors. I could go on for pages. 

Edited October 23, 2016 by MormonGator

[unixknight]

5 hours ago, NightSG said:

I trust my self defense instructors.  That doesn't mean I don't check the chamber of a (usually simulated) handgun before we use it, or test the edge of a (usually rubber) knife.  If he handed me a weapon I wasn't familiar with enough to verify its status, I would insist on having it explained such that I could confirm to my satisfaction the exact degree of "safe" (getting pistol whipped with a fake gun will still cause injury, as will a rubber knife in the eye) that it is.  Beyond that, I have to trust that they won't kill or seriously injure me without a weapon; at least three of them are certainly capable of overcoming my best efforts.

And yet, the consequences of an unsuccessful disarm against a real, loaded gun would be over in an instant.  (At least for the one trying to disarm.)  If someone is expecting me to accept a decision that may have eternal consequences for me, I would certainly expect some explanation from that person, regardless of whether he's an 8th degree black belt who was teaching before I discovered girls and has a significant interest in not having the local headlines be about a death in his dojo, or a SP with maybe a couple years experience who may or may not even be asking the Spirit for the answer he's giving.

And if guns and knives were agents acting on behalf of the Lord this would be a great analogy.

Even if I were to accept the analogy, that means double checking the decisions of a Stake President.  Is a Bishop the best place to go to do that?  I'm thinking no.

4 hours ago, Maureen said:

The OP has already mentioned that she is 19 years old.

M.

Great.  My point remains the same.

[NightSG]

4 hours ago, MormonGator said:

You and I have had greatly different self defense instructors throughout the years. I've had some good, and some are egomaniacal lunatics that make me look humble and well adjusted.

The first piece of equipment you should familiarize yourself with in any dojo is the door.  An inflated ego is the most dangerous thing on any mat, and you're not going to learn good things from some self-aggrandizing twit, no matter what titles or ranks he holds.

[Guest MormonGator]

10 hours ago, NightSG said:

The first piece of equipment you should familiarize yourself with in any dojo is the door.  An inflated ego is the most dangerous thing on any mat, and you're not going to learn good things from some self-aggrandizing twit, no matter what titles or ranks he holds.

It actually taught me a life lesson. Just because you hold some title or are very educated, it doesn't mean that you know everything about every single topic out there.  A wise person remembers that.

[Maureen]

18 hours ago, unixknight said:

...Great.  My point remains the same.

I found your "You're less than a year from being 19" to be poor wording if you knew she was already 19. Next time try something more straightforward like "Since you've only been 19 for a few months".

M.

[NightSG]

2 hours ago, MormonGator said:

It actually taught me a life lesson. Just because you hold some title or are very educated, it doesn't mean that you know everything about every single topic out there.  A wise person remembers that.

There's an aikido instructor I'd like to study under it he was closer, because when he did a seminar at our dojo, one of his points of instruction is that even at 8th degree he learns something from every student he teaches; even the newest white belt's mistakes could result in a different way of doing something.

Guy was amazing, too; his timing and soft control was so dead on perfect you'd honestly think you just stumbled and fell before he even touched you.  Usually took 3-4 tries to believe that some of his techniques really worked.

[Guest MormonGator]

6 minutes ago, NightSG said:

There's an aikido instructor I'd like to study under it he was closer, because when he did a seminar at our dojo, one of his points of instruction is that even at 8th degree he learns something from every student he teaches; even the newest white belt's mistakes could result in a different way of doing something.

Guy was amazing, too; his timing and soft control was so dead on perfect you'd honestly think you just stumbled and fell before he even touched you.  Usually took 3-4 tries to believe that some of his techniques really worked.

The best one I had said "Bruce Lee carried a 45 for protection because he knew that even though he was great, few people can win a "real fight" if it's 5 on 1. If it was good enough for him, it's good enough for you tough guy." He said that to a group of black belts who thought they were the greatest. 

[NightSG]

37 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

The best one I had said "Bruce Lee carried a 45 for protection because he knew that even though he was great, few people can win a "real fight" if it's 5 on 1. If it was good enough for him, it's good enough for you tough guy." He said that to a group of black belts who thought they were the greatest. 

[JohnsonJones]

 

On ‎10‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 8:13 AM, estradling75 said:

Back to the OP the Bishop and Stake President both have the responsibly to make sure those going to the temple are worthy and ready.  Generally speaking those going at or around age 19 (or earlier) are those that have made a mature commitment (even if they are still not fully mature themselves) of serving a mission (or in rare cases a marriage sealed in the temple)  They aren't people just sitting around saying I feel the spirit... they are people actively working to do the various things commanded.

The OP has not talked about being Sealed or Mission... so we have no clue where they are on either of those.

But it is not beyond the bounds of reason for a Stake President to want see some kind of active progress forward before giving a recommend.  Saying be 19 while unusual is basically saying lets keep her at the same levels as Sisters who have put in their papers and committed to a mission (or committed to temple marriage) That is a awesome peer group to be in from a spiritual and commitment to the Gospel perspective.  It can only be seen as a punishment or punitive from the mindset of "I want it... So it is owed to me and you must give it to me right now" perspective.

 

I assume the OP is talking about a TR for endowment.  It becomes unusual if it is discussing a TR to do baptisms.

Assuming that it is talking about the former...

The above expresses what I think is the most important point in the entire discussion.  The easiest way to get a Temple Recommend at a young age is normally due to some commitment made in regards to the church or personal life.  Such commitments, as mentioned, would be things like serving a Mission or getting sealed for all eternity in the Temple (for which one would need a Temple recommend).

No mention of such a decision was noted by the OP.  I understand that the Bishop has agreed to talk to the SP, but as the Bishop also noted, the chances for the SP to extend a TR currently is low.  Part of this is perhaps the SP needs to see some sort of serious commitment that shows why the individual either needs the Temple Recommend at this time (such as marriage or protections it may afford to a missionary) or the steadfastness that one will need towards the church and it's foundations.

I would suggest patience.  In some ways, it is like Marriage.  There are those who want to be married for eternity right now so they can fulfill the goal and commandment for it.  However, they may not have the right person (or be willing to be married to any person just to fulfill it, or maybe they have no person at all there).  If they practice righteousness, pray and listen to the spirit, have faith and patience, all blessings that they strive for in righteousness will eventually be granted to them.

We can all receive personal revelation (and in fact, in instances of marriage I would HIGHLY suggest it), but in all things there is a time and a place.  Sometimes it may seem things don't go as quickly as we want them to (and at other times they go too quickly).  The desire to have a Temple Recommend is a righteous desire and I hope you keep that desire.  If you can, utilize the Temple Recommend that you already have (hopefully) fully and participate in the Temple by regularly going to do Baptisms for the Dead.  This can also be an indicator of how dedicated you are to participating in the Temple and how strong your desire for  a recommend to take out your endowment is.