Question about Bishops/EQP's/HP Group Leaders

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Tex

Keys are not required to recommend. However, you may want to consider, if you are as unlucky as you claim, sitting down with the bishop and asking him to help you be more effective at making them. Maybe he can give you some insight in to how he approaches your recommendations and how you can make them better.

Certainly it's a better option than metaphorically taking your ball and going home. Most bishops appreciate their auxiliaries' input.

I'm ok with giving him a handful of names. I just don't think praying about it is very satisfying. As in, this is the name we prayed about and felt most strongly about.

It's not satisfying to feel like the Lord communicated to you, and then to have it rejected. You feel like 'so what am I to make of that? I guess I was wrong.' I'm ok with being wrong, I'm saying that being wrong doesn't inspire confidence in your skills. And it's not like I am wrong alone, I am wrong with the former counselor in the stake presidency and the other counselor.

[BigFatMeanie]

Originally Posted by Tex

I think we should sponsor a seminar where all Cougarguarders can come and learn about what the priesthood is, and how it operates. It's apparently badly overdue.

I had the same experience that MW had about recommending names for teachers when I was the Sunday School president. At one point, I had recommended 4 or 5 different names (not simultaneously - consecutively after the Bishopric rejected each one). Names that I had prayed about and felt good about. Obviously the Bishopric had someone specific in mind so I told the Bishop "Just pick who you think is best Bishop and it will be fine with me". The Bishop said, "we think XYZ would do a great job." I said "sounds good to me."

If the Bishop had XYZ in mind then he could have simply given me a list of possible candidates that included XYZ and let me pray about it instead of going through a repetitive and fruitless process. I'm currently serving in my second Bishopric with a great Bishop and in both of my Bishopric experiences I've seen the Bishopric suggest some possible names to an organizational head and have the organizational head pray about it and select one of those candidates instead of floundering around with name after name after name when the Bishopric already had someone in mind. But, I guess in your world neither I nor my past or present Bishopric really understand how the priesthood is supposed to operate...

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by BigFatMeanie

I'm currently serving in my second Bishopric with a great Bishop and in both of my Bishopric experiences I've seen the Bishopric suggest some possible names to an organizational head and have the organizational head pray about it and select one of those candidates instead of floundering around with name after name after name when the Bishopric already had someone in mind.

Agree with this. The bottom line is that Bishops come from all different backgrounds and some are better administrators than others.

Take notes so when you are Bishop you will do the same.

[MikeWaters]

I haven't found out about the last three additions until their sustaining. That's fine. We keep going. I don't doubt that the Bishop is doing what he feels is best for both the organization and the person called.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by BigFatMeanie

I had the same experience that MW had about recommending names for teachers when I was the Sunday School president. At one point, I had recommended 4 or 5 different names (not simultaneously - consecutively after the Bishopric rejected each one). Names that I had prayed about and felt good about. Obviously the Bishopric had someone specific in mind so I told the Bishop "Just pick who you think is best Bishop and it will be fine with me". The Bishop said, "we think XYZ would do a great job." I said "sounds good to me."

If the Bishop had XYZ in mind then he could have simply given me a list of possible candidates that included XYZ and let me pray about it instead of going through a repetitive and fruitless process. I'm currently serving in my second Bishopric with a great Bishop and in both of my Bishopric experiences I've seen the Bishopric suggest some possible names to an organizational head and have the organizational head pray about it and select one of those candidates instead of floundering around with name after name after name when the Bishopric already had someone in mind. But, I guess in your world neither I nor my past or present Bishopric really understand how the priesthood is supposed to operate...

I believe I just suggested that collaboration is a good thing. I just suggested Mike talk to the bishop and ask him about what would be a more effective way to make recommendations. I agree that playing "guess what's on my mind" is a bad thing for a bishop to do. And I understand that it's frustrating to get repeat rejections ... a smart bishop will notice this is happening and take steps to correct it so his leaders don't feel like Mike feels.

The principle that's being lost here is that it's not an auxiliary leader's role to call. When in these callings you pray about someone for a position, you must always approach it with the caveat that the Lord may direct the bishop elsewhere. As I said before, the moment you've decided that this person is "IT"--that's been confirmed by revelation that they are THE MAN--you have overstepped your bounds.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by creekster

WHen I was executive secretary in a bishoproc a few years ago we had a sister in the ward who was a real superstar. Capbhle, charitable, friendly, loving, talented, she had it all and everybody loved her and I bnever saw her atempt something that didn't result in a great sucess. The intersting thing is that every time, and I mean EVERY time there was a reorganization of some auxialliary, or there was an opening ofr a teacher, she was asked for by the organization. If the bishop had given her to every body that asked, she would have changed clalings at least once a month and I am not exaggerating.

I think it is a little like finding someone to marry. You find someone that is right for you but they are not the ONLY one that could ever be right for you. Callings are like this. I have no doubt that most or even all of the people asking for this sister were indeed correct that she was perfect for the job, but she was not the only one and others could and did serve in those spots with success as well. The bishop has to eb the final word and it is his stewardship to so act.

Everyone keeps talking past each other when I think Creekster summed up the answer already. Good post, Creekster.

[Hazzard]

Originally Posted by BigFatMeanie

Personally, I've always thought the HPGL and EQP were toothless callings. In effect, they can't even make in-quorum (or in-group) callings without approval of the bishop. Although the classic problem of "responsibility without authority" isn't as bad for the EQP (because he holds priesthood keys), the HPGL is about as powerful in a ward as the Sunday School president.

Originally Posted by Archaea

The ward's keys are held by the Bishop but the stake's keys are held by the STake President.

The EQPs and HP Ls report officially to the Stake President but do not overstep the administrative control of the bishop's jurisdiction.

Wouldn't it make more sense to just have the EQP and HPGL report directly to the bishop, as the bishop is the presiding high priest of the ward anyway?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Hazzard

Wouldn't it make more sense to just have the EQP and HPGL report directly to the bishop, as the bishop is the presiding high priest of the ward anyway?

President is the one with the keys though. Bishop's presiding because the key holder is not there.

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Presiding is the one with the keys though. He's presiding because the key holder is not there.

Right. The EQP has keys and thus needs to report to the guy with the MP keys (Stake President). Why the HP is a "group" of the Stake HP Quorum vs. a quorum of its own is intersting though. The only thing I can think of for that is that HP Groups tend to be much less needy than EQ's.

[BigFatMeanie]

Originally Posted by Tex

I believe I just suggested that collaboration is a good thing. I just suggested Mike talk to the bishop and ask him about what would be a more effective way to make recommendations. I agree that playing "guess what's on my mind" is a bad thing for a bishop to do. And I understand that it's frustrating to get repeat rejections ... a smart bishop will notice this is happening and take steps to correct it so his leaders don't feel like Mike feels.

The principle that's being lost here is that it's not an auxiliary leader's role to call. When in these callings you pray about someone for a position, you must always approach it with the caveat that the Lord may direct the bishop elsewhere. As I said before, the moment you've decided that this person is "IT"--that's been confirmed by revelation that they are THE MAN--you have overstepped your bounds.

I don't think anyone is claiming that it's an auxiliary leader's role to call as opposed to simply recommend. Waters' complaint, which I echo, was about playing "guess what's on my mind" when your in a recommendation role - which you've just agreed isn't a good thing for a bishop to do. I'm just not seeing that the various comments indicate that there's a "principle that's being lost". In other words, I think your offer to teach a seminar was premature.

However, if you do want to teach a seminar then you might want to consider how many Bishops often overstep their bounds when it comes to a Elder's Quorum President's authority to make an in-quorum calling. The Bishop doesn't make the call or set apart an Elders Quorum instructor or a Home Teaching District Supervisor or even a quorum committee chairperson. The Bishop should have veto power for reasons of a candidate's worthiness; however, aside from candidate worthiness the Bishop technically doesn't have priesthood stewardship over the Elders Quorum. Unfortunately, many Bishops in the church effectively emasculate their EQP by insisting (unrighteously, I think) that the Bishop gets who the Bishop wants in the internal EQ callings. Perhaps thats a principle that's being lost that you can address in your seminar?