Hello again, everyone! I just wanted to post to pass along this article from the Church News, which sets in context recent teachings of Church leaders regarding what it means to sustain our 13 (soon to be 15 again) in their callings as prophets, seers, and revelators. Among other highlights, it mentions that, as we know, the President of the Church is the only one recognized and sustained to receive revelation for the Church as a whole, although we have also had affirmations that the words of the other apostles likewise constitutes the word of the Lord.
There has seemed to be a mistaken idea put forth by certain individuals that this process is a "vote" and that, if they choose, they are free to vocalize their refusal to sustain the Brethren. There are also those that seem to be under the impression that if they pester the Brethren enough on certain subjects, that will somehow sway them to consider changing Church doctrine and policy.
But both are categorical falsehoods. The Lord has also said that those who refuse to sustain those He has put into place, and who refuse to accept the will of the Lord as expressed by the apostles will one day be held accountable before Him for rejecting those He has called, sustained, and ordained through His prophets and apostles.
So with these ideas in mind, I want to unequivocally testify that I know that the 13 current apostles and the other two that will likely be called within the next week are those the Lord needs in those positions at this time. Whenever there has been a vacancy in the Church presidency or the apostleship, as far back as I can remember, I have prayed in advance to know that whomever was called were the individuals the Lord wanted in those positions at that time.
And each time, as soon as the calls were announced, whether or not it was something I had personally suggested or considered, I have gained the instant confirmation that those calls to those individuals have come from the Lord.
As perhaps a few of you may be aware, I was honored sometime after last General Conference to discover that my thoughts on who might fill the apostolic vacancy were themselves a focus of a post on the Mormon Light blog. Despite my protests to the contrary, the most recent version of that article billed those thoughts as "mere speculation, but [something of which it was] wise to be aware of some of the possibilities".
So I want to clear that point up right now. I never have and never will condone the idea of speculation, and I am just as fully willing to sustain any two Brethren to the apostolic call that may not be on my list as I would be to sustain and support the calls of either or both apostles that did make my list.
This is because I do have that witness, that such calls are divinely directed. President Nelson has been or will be led to the identity of the two men that should be called to the apostleship. And as the Church News article mentioned, although any two Brethren could be called to that assignment at any time, if either or both of those Brethren are not necessarily who anyone expects, that does not mean that any others who may have made the list of anyone else is any less worthy of the calling.
For that reason, I share my absolute conviction that I know the Lord has prepared the Brethren who will be called to the apostleship in just about a week. And there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that He will confirm again to me that those who are called were divinely appointed to join the ranks of the apostleship at this time.
Our current and past apostles and prophets have willingly given up any claim to prestige, acclaim, or success in their professional lives to serve a cause higher than themselves, and what will be said by them next weekend will truly represent the word of the Lord, the will of the Lord, the mind of the Lord, and the power of God unto our salvation.
I know that because I have sought to obtain and have received such a witness, which has sweetly been reiterated to me any time I have asked for such a reconfirmation. My hope and prayer is that all who read these words either have that witness or, if they do not, they will do that which is necessary to obtain such a witness for themselves, and I share these thoughts in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen,
Friday, March 23, 2018
Church News Releases Article Explaining the Principle of Common Consent Prior to the Solemn Assembly
I have had a lifelong love for Church history, which has extended to ongoing reports of the ministry of our apostles and prophets, General Conference, and all temple developments. This blog enables me to share that love with all who read my thoughts on these developments, which are sometimes reported multiple times per day as needed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
In addition to my life-long love for the subjects which I cover in the posts of this blog, I have long held the belief that we can disagree without becoming disagreeable. Differences of opinion are natural, while being disagreeable in expressing those differences is not. And in that sense, I have no desire to close the door on anyone who earnestly desires to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on subjects covered in the posts on this blog.
At the same time, however, I recognize that we live in a time when incivility, discourtesy, unkindness, and even cyber-bullying has regrettably become part of online interactions. With that in mind, while anyone who wishes can comment on anything if they choose to do so, I hereby reserve the right to immediately delete any comments which are critical, unkind, lack civility, or promote prodcuts, services, and values contrary to either the Church, or to the rules of online etiquette.
I'd also like to remind all who comment here that I try to respond personally to each individual comment as I feel is appropriate. Such replies are not meant to end the conversation, but to acknowledge earnest feedback as it is submitted.
And in order to better preserve the spirit and pure intentions for which this blog was established, I also hereby request that anyone not commenting with a regular user name (particularly those whose comments appear under the "Unknown" or "Anonymous" monikers, give the rest of us a name to work with in addressing any replies. If such individuals do not wish to disclose their actual given names, a pseudonym or nickname would suffice.
Any comments made by individuals who opt to not give a name by which they can ber identified may, depending on the substance and tone of such comments, be subject to deletion as well. I would respectfully ask that all of us do all we can to keep the dialogue positive, polite, and without malice or ill-will. May the Lord bless us all in our discussion of these important matters.