Comments on: Unconventional https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2009/10/24/unconventional/ Thought-provoking commentary on life, politics, religion and social issues. Wed, 28 Oct 2009 15:30:07 +0000 hourly 1 By: Anna https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2009/10/24/unconventional/comment-page-1/#comment-125353 Wed, 28 Oct 2009 15:30:07 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/?p=2162#comment-125353 Very interesting post..Being unconventional can lead to great things. I’m sure a lot of people benefited from the unconventional things you did.

]]>
By: Kim Siever https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2009/10/24/unconventional/comment-page-1/#comment-125332 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:04:01 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/?p=2162#comment-125332 t want to upset someone because I pulled away a person they were going to call to their organization.</p> <p>That being said, the one time my bishop said I could have someone, I talked him into doing it anyhow, and he ended up being the worst secretary I ever had.</p> ]]> I think it matters, if only for courtesy. I hated it when the stake poached people I already called. I wouldn’t want to upset someone because I pulled away a person they were going to call to their organization.

That being said, the one time my bishop said I could have someone, I talked him into doing it anyhow, and he ended up being the worst secretary I ever had.

]]>
By: JM https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2009/10/24/unconventional/comment-page-1/#comment-125329 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:28:29 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/?p=2162#comment-125329 IMHO, the only reason why the bishop has anything to do with any call in the EQ would be because of a known worthyness issue. Period.

The elders quorum is a stake quorum. Bishop = ward level callings. Does the bishop get veto power on any other stake level calling? Not in my experience. Why he does in the EQ is a mystery to me.

If the EQP wants to call someone as secretary, then the only reason why he needs to consult with the bishop is in case there is a worthyness issue. If there isn’t, there shouldn’t be any issue with issuing a call.

Same goes for the counselors, but those come from the Stake President.

It’s not that the bishop approves it. He is just privy to information that the EQP may not know.

re: 13, Kim, you had a nice bishop. but it shouldn’t matter if he was being considered for another call. The elders quorum is a stake level call.

]]>
By: HeidiAnn https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2009/10/24/unconventional/comment-page-1/#comment-125325 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:41:36 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/?p=2162#comment-125325 On second thought, the wards we’ve been in have been pretty unconventional, but you wouldn’t know it by looking, well, maybe in this current one you could tell, haha. I think our current bishop kind of likes the “unconventional.” The 2nd counselor in the bishopric has a “stubble” beard and wore a dark gray shirt on the stand a couple of weeks ago….ooo, what a rebel!

]]>
By: Kim Siever https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2009/10/24/unconventional/comment-page-1/#comment-125323 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:30:14 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/?p=2162#comment-125323 t seen done by other elders quorum presidents. Granted, I have had only 9.</p> ]]> Interesting, the things I had listed I haven’t seen done by other elders quorum presidents. Granted, I have had only 9.

]]>
By: HeidiAnn https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2009/10/24/unconventional/comment-page-1/#comment-125322 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:10:02 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/?p=2162#comment-125322 Based on what my DH says, you’re actually pretty conventional-at least, judging by the wards we’ve been in. I’m not sure about the last point on HP advancement, but most of the men we’ve seen become HPs, about 75% were under 40.

]]>
By: Kim Siever https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2009/10/24/unconventional/comment-page-1/#comment-125321 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:49:45 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/?p=2162#comment-125321 Whenever we had a calling to fill, we would consider several names. We would let the bishop know were going to choose from these names. That would give him time to let us know if any of them were being considered for a different calling or if they were unworthy to serve. Then we would discuss it at our next meeting, make a decision, and pray about it. Once we received unanimous confirmation, we told the bishop who we picked. He never turned us down at the end stage.

]]>
By: jjackson https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2009/10/24/unconventional/comment-page-1/#comment-125319 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:35:55 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/?p=2162#comment-125319 JM – I thought I did use the word “call” referring to the secretary. But it always has to be approved by the Bishop, and that’s where the problems arose. I should have taken your approach right off the bat instead of my passive-aggressive tactics, it would have saved a lot of trouble.

]]>
By: TStevens https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2009/10/24/unconventional/comment-page-1/#comment-125299 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:33:51 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/?p=2162#comment-125299 Yes you are correct – but I am such a spiritual giant the SP could do nothing but approve everything I said or risk the consequences from above :-)

The kid is a great counselor. He is an Eagle Scout who completed all the merit badges. State champion and national finalist in the science fair, saved enough money running his own business to pay for all of college if he had to (scholarships everywhere). No worries there and he is off to Mongolia real soon.

]]>
By: JM https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2009/10/24/unconventional/comment-page-1/#comment-125297 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:29:29 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/?p=2162#comment-125297 Technically, you do call the secretary.

If I had to do it all over again, I would offer my suggestions for counselors and if any of them were turned down, I wouldn’t offer any other names. Same for secretary.

If that means that I’m flying solo, so be it. That’s pretty much the only thing I’d do differently.

]]>