Will he tell the bishop?

[JohnsonJones]

As something to note, IN MY OPINION, the WORST Bishops are typically the ones that seek after it.  Those who WEAR IT AS A BADGE OF HONOR...I try to be good, but if I ever did commit a great sin (which I hope not too, but no one should be prideful about what the future may hold, I hope to endure to the end, but I am not there yet) even I probably wouldn't admit a single thing to such a character. 

Being a Bishop should NOT be something considered a Badge of Honor, no more than a primary teacher or Youth Leader is.  In fact, I'd consider the Primary teacher FAR more important for the Kingdom of Heaven and a far greater badge than a Bishop, as the primary teacher is working with the very essence of heaven and molding the young lives to determine the future of the church, the gospel, and the membership of the church. 

That guy that's been a scout leader for the past 40 years, is now in his 60s or 70s or older...Now THAT's a badge of honor that everyone should be astounded by.  This guy has devoted his life to the youth of the church and building upon the very foundations which have made our church what it is now. 

That lady who's been in young woman's for all of her life and is now in her 60s or 70s or older, THAT's a badge of honor.  She's influenced so many lives and so many people, one cannot even count how much influence she's had upon the membership today.

Most people honor the position of a Bishop (just like they do a Stake President, or another), but one must remember it's the position, and not necessarily the person.  It goes on from there.  I think it was Uchtdorf who gave a talk in General conference about advice he received where he was told people honor his position, but he must not let it go to his head (or something like that).  Instead, it is upon humility, and a desire to serve the Lord where true honor comes from, whether a Stake President,  a Bishop, a Sunday School Teacher, a Primary leader, or any other position in the church.

Edited June 28, 2017 by JohnsonJones

[NeuroTypical]

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Judge not that ye be not judged.  

PS:  Unfortunately, you have Bishops that do NOT keep confidences, Bishops that abuse their role/power as a Bishop, and many other unfortunate things.  To tell someone they are going to be condemned forever because they have not confessed to a Bishop is a TERRIBLE judgement for someone to try to claim.  I know why there are MANY that do not trust their Bishops, and others.  Heck, there are many I KNOW do not trust ME and actually BLAME me for simply being who I am in life, much less any church calling.

Whoa, whoa, whooooa there.  Time out.

Ok, setting aside your counsel to judge not and immediately following it by a slew of judgments...

I call foul.  I mean, I believe you know many people who don't trust bishops or others.   But the only person talking about eternal condemnation here is you, JJ.   And how, exactly do you know there are "many" bishops who "do not trust ME and actually BLAME me for simply being who I am in life"?  How exactly can you make that determination about their beliefs without unrighteously judging them, as you just advised?

[Just_A_Guy]

Don't judge me for judging differently than you!!!

[Vort]

53 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Don't judge me for judging differently than you!!!

I adjudge your judgment as judgey.

[SilentOne]

 

8 hours ago, Vort said:

Rather than beg not to be called as a bishop (which wish you're very likely to get),

6 hours ago, Bad Karma said:

I am not sure if you meant to say that I WISH to become a Bishop, no sir, such a thought II hold great anxiety about.

I thought @Vort was saying you will likely be granted the wish of NOT becoming bishop.

6 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I know why there are MANY that do not trust their Bishops, and others.  Heck, there are many I KNOW do not trust ME and actually BLAME me for simply being who I am in life, much less any church calling.

3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

I call foul.  I mean, I believe you know many people who don't trust bishops or others.... And how, exactly do you know there are "many" bishops who "do not trust ME and actually BLAME me for simply being who I am in life"?

And here I thought @JohnsonJones was saying many people in general do not trust him, not many bishops specifically.

[Bad Karma]

3 hours ago, SilentOne said:

 

I thought @Vort was saying you will likely be granted the wish of NOT becoming bishop.

 

On that note, that is darn good news! There's plenty of good callings out there just as important and far less likely to give me a heart attack,

[JohnsonJones]

5 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Whoa, whoa, whooooa there.  Time out.

Ok, setting aside your counsel to judge not and immediately following it by a slew of judgments...

I call foul.  I mean, I believe you know many people who don't trust bishops or others.   But the only person talking about eternal condemnation here is you, JJ.   And how, exactly do you know there are "many" bishops who "do not trust ME and actually BLAME me for simply being who I am in life"?  How exactly can you make that determination about their beliefs without unrighteously judging them, as you just advised?

Several were talking about eternal consequences and other types of things regarding the original poster that were very uncalled for.  This forum had judged and condemned the individual without even knowing the sin or the facts of it.  We do not know the nature of the sin, whether it was even a sin, or what the events around it were. If I were the individual, I would have absolutely felt condemned by some of the posts in this thread.  I know that was not the intent of the individuals (or so I hope), but the tone would have made me feel condemned if I were the OP, and never wanting to return.

Several mistakes were made as well, including saying if someone was a victim of a crime they absolutely needed to go see a Bishop, Implications that ONLY the Bishop can tell if someone is forgiven (which implies that one has to go see a Bishop to BE forgiven of certain sins, which implies a Catholic type thing regarding confession...which is ABSOLUTELY untrue) and several other things.

This type of condemnation is NOT the type of thing I believe we want to see in the church.  It's akin to the Catholic idea that we have to go see someone in order to confess our sins.  This is NOT the LDS way, nor is it what the LDS church preaches.  This type of impression, that one HAS TO GO SEE the BISHOP presents a very Catholic type mindset and changes the onus of repentance from a personal relationship between the person and the Lord, to one where the Bishop is the one granting forgiveness because one HAS to see the Bishop if one sins.

This turns a LOT of people away (though there are other bigger issues there.  Some of it is that in many wards, there IS NOT confidentiality.  In others, the Bishops DO have a power complex going on.  Then, there's a whole different item regarding LDS leadership that some claim that I'm still pondering, as some of it feels like a direct accusation against me and others, but I'm trying to ascertain if I need to be more humble regarding the validity of those claims...which are too long to go into here in any case).

Simply telling someone they HAVE to go see a Bishop without knowing tons about it, is probably going a little too far to the extreme.  I'm not about to tell some individual who seems to be terrified at the prospect that they have to do anything like that.  It's a great way to scare them off, and to do the exact opposite.  If they are posting here, they already know to a degree what they should or should not do, and obviously guilt is eating away at them as well as fear.  PAM and some others had a great response I think, but I think the individual already KNOWS what they should or should not do. 

I think what they are looking for more, was support, not the judgment of what they, individually need to do.  An acknowledgement of their fears, and encouragement to help them find a way to ease their fears, and to find ways to know they have forgiveness is far better, in my opinion, then telling them what they have to do or not to do in this instance (and every instance is different, this particular one needed more support than anything else.

Knowledge about what a Bishop's actual role is, I think, far more helpful in their decisions making process than simply telling them they have to do something.  If they have that knowledge of what a Bishop does and the Bishops role in the process, they can decide better for themselves what they should do.

Many assume they have to tell a Bishop about certain types of things, which, in truth, isn't really true.  A Bishop is there to help, but a Bishop also has a life and telling the Bishop EVERY sin in the book no matter what...I hinted a little at it, but a Bishop really doesn't need to hear a LOT of the things some people think they need to tell the Bishop.  A Bishop will do all they can to help you if you can't do it yourself, but sitting through a confession booth with someone normally has me trying to help them understand that most of these things is not something they really need to do.

That does not negate what a Bishops role is in greater sins, or rather sins that may weigh more heavily on one's conscience than others (after all, all sin is an offense), but we shouldn't be saying things about one's eternal salvation in this case, and instead show our love and support for the individual who is obviously having a very hard time in regards to some situations.

 

And yes, I was commenting that there are many who do not trust me or others like me in LDS callings or positions.  This is not the thread specifically for that, though I suppose I can address it in my typical thread for my ponderings.

[NeuroTypical]

5 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Simply telling someone they HAVE to go see a Bishop without knowing tons about it, is probably going a little too far to the extreme. 

Many assume they have to tell a Bishop about certain types of things, which, in truth, isn't really true. 

Ok, I agree, there is no force involved in confession.  We've got D&C 121 that makes it pretty clear: "when we undertake ... to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man."

So yeah, our church and it's principles do not involve force or pressure unrighteous dominion or compulsion.  By that definition, nobody HAS to do anything in this church, including confess to the bishop.

That said, the repentance process is what it is, and includes what it includes.  And part of the repentance process involves confession.  And part of confession involves confessing to the correct people.  For serious stuff like sexual transgression, that's the bishop or branch president.  It just is.

Do you seek forgiveness?  Do you wish to avail yourself of the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ and have Him wash your sins away, that you can walk clean?  By that definition, for some serious sins, yes, you HAVE to confess to your bishop.  If you haven't confessed, you haven't fully repented.  Your sins will remain with you in certain ways.

Again, the doctrine is pretty clear, but I also have the added benefit of personal experience in the matter.  My crap was done in my early teens through early 20's.  Then I cleaned up and lived righteously.  I got active again.  I got sealed in the temple.  I had callings and did good.  But I can't begin to describe to you how cleansing, how freeing, it was to to my bishop in my mid-30s and confess all that crap.  I bore burdens I just assumed were part of life.  I believed things about myself that just weren't true. 

Again, someone give me a higher building to shout this from: Go confess to your bishop!  If it turns out you didn't really need to, that's fine, and he'll probably let you know that.  But if you need to, there is freedom and lightness and joy waiting for you, on the other side of the scary and painful confession.

Edited June 28, 2017 by NeuroTypical

[The Folk Prophet]

Why is it so hard for people to understand the difference between:

"If you sin and don't repent then you will be condemned"

and

"You are condemned!"

??

[mordorbund]

3 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Why is it so hard for people to understand the difference between:

"If you sin and don't repent then you will be condemned"

and

"You are condemned!"

??

"You sir, are not fit for public office" - Bernie Sanders, probably.