Stokes Sounds Off

Search This Blog

Leaderboard

Friday, September 21, 2018

Further Additional Church News Reported

Hello again, everyone! Since my last report sharing general Church news update two days ago, a few additional developments have been reported via the Newsroom on the Church's official website and on the Church News website. So let's dive right into the discussion of those new articles.

We start in the Newsroom, where two new articles have been published within the last 48 hours. First, as some of you may be aware, Elder Joseph W. Sitati, our first General Authority Seventy from Kenya, has been serving as First Counselor in the Africa Southeast Area Presidency since August. He was invited to speak at the 3rd All Africa Congress on Religious Freedom last week. He talked to the religious leaders, government officials, and scholars about how human flourishing, in all aspects of an individual's life, is a result of religious freedom. This continues the Church's tradition of speaking in public forums on the role religious freedom plays in the betterment of people worldwide. The Newsroom provided both this general summary of what he said and the complete transcript of his remarks. The conference this year was held in Rwanda, where the Church is still in its' infancy.

And the Newsroom essentially killed the proverbial two birds with one stone with this article highlighting both the winners of the annual "Faith Counts" Video Contest, in addition to sharing another account of the ongoing ministry of our Church's female leaders as details were provided about how Sister Lisa L. Harkness, First Counselor in the Primary General Presidency, not only attended the Faith Counts Awards Ceremony, but also made outreach visits to an Ohio resettlement agency built to help serve refugees and immigrants, in addition to a stop at Columbus Global Academy, which teaches English as a Second Language. I am grateful, as I stated around 36 hours ago, for the additional ways in which the ministry of the female members and leaders of our Church are being highlighted more fully of late.

Turning now to the Church News website, one story highlights how 4,000 citizens in the Philippines have found refuge at Church meetinghouses. In the meantime, the Church News shares a recent interview done by local Utah radio station KUER with the same Church leaders that have represented the Church on the previously-mentioned coalition which includes faith leaders, prominent political figures from Utah, and medical professionals, who expressed concerns about the current wording of the proposition going before Utah voters this November which would legalize the use of medical marijuana but which provides insufficient regulations to ensure that illegal use of it is still discouraged.

The three Church leaders, (Elder Jack N. Gerard, who heads up the Church Public Affairs Department; Elder Craig C. Christensen, President of the Utah Area; and Sister Harkness) spoke during the KUER radio show to further explain why the Church would gladly support the legal use of medical marijuana for those who need it, but why the Church and the members of the coalition have come out against the initiative in its' current form. You can read more about that radio interview here.

With the open house for the Concepcion Chile Temple now well underway, the Church has provided a video for those who wish to virtually tour the temple (if they cannot get to the open house). And finally, Elder David A. Bednar recently returned from an extended visit to Mexico, where he ministered to members and missionaries, taking time to address concerns on an individual basis and to conduct Church business while he was there. The Church News provided this report of that visit. It would not surprise me in any way to learn that he spent some time while there looking at potential temple locations. As I mentioned previously, the Church has at least two and perhaps double that amount of potential locations where a temple would make sense. Given that the latest information I have indicates that the largest temple district in Mexico is in its' capital city, I could see the Church potentially splitting that at least two ways.

Although the Church in Mexico has recently seen mass consolidations of wards, branches, districts, and stakes, I do not see anything that would give me a reason to suggest that future temples for Mexico should not be on the radar in the near future, especially if President Nelson's temple-building plans prove to be as extensive as so many have indicated.

I continue to monitor any and all Church news and temple developments and will do my level best to bring word of those to you all as I receive it in the near future. That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated on any post anytime. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added content, please feel free to subscribe. Until my next post, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

Thursday, September 20, 2018

BREAKING NEWS: First President Called for the Fortaleza Brazil Temple

Hello again, everyone! It was just brought to my attention a few minutes ago that the Church has called the first president for the Fortaleza Brazil Temple. That news was first reported in the Church News 4 hours ago, but due to my having a somewhat busy afternoon, I was actually not the first to find this news originally, which has not happened in a while. That said, the new president is someone known to the people of Brazil, a native Brazilian who has served in Brazil as an area seventy, mission MTC, stake and branch president, a patriarch, and a temple sealer. In other words, he is well known to, and loved and respected by the Brazilian Saints and will be a good fit for the first president of the Fortaleza Brazil Temple.

Now, I also wanted to note a caution here: While I appreciate the optimism expressed by many who see the calls of the presidents for all the new temples anticipated to be dedicated next year as a positive sign that such events could occur sooner than anticipated, and while I am not dismissing the prospect that part of President Nelson's plan in having the temple department hire a number of new employees could be to add manpower to the construction of temples already in progress, which could potentially accelerate the temples now under construction, in addition to enabling new ones to be rapidly built, the latter point seems to be a less likely prospect.

I say that because my brother took a class in high school in which he was part of a construction crew for existing projects in American Fork. And no matter what they were working on, the size of the crew was far more likely to diminish than increase as some of them either quit the project and the class or were transferred to another project. I recognize that the Church projects may be more contractual than a job done by a high school class, but, that said, nothing I have heard through the sources I have available have indicated that the most recent estimates offered for the temple events anticipated to occur next year will be accelerated beyond the more general time-frames I have previously provided.

As a review, when I posted the news of the first president for the Lisbon Portugal Temple one week ago today, in that same post, I provided the latest general estimates I had for temple events anticipated to occur in 2019. Unless there is something big about which I and the sources which I have available for such information are not aware, AFAIK, those estimates have not changed at all.

That same post from one week ago shared the complete list I had assembled of temples which have had or may yet have a new president called. I refer you to that full list for any information on those temples. But that brings the total number of temples which have had a new president announced this year to a grand total of 66, with the only other temple on my list of those which may get a new president being the one in Washington DC. But wait, you might be saying, didn't that temple close for renovation in March of this year, and isn't it only anticipated to be rededicated in 2020?

Yes, that is the case. But the Asuncion Paraguay Temple, which closed almost a year ago (last November) and for which, AFAIK, the renovation process has yet to fully begin, had a new president announced earlier this year (as evidenced by the list I linked to earlier). So it would not be unreasonable, in my opinion, to assume that a new president could similarly be announced for the Washington DC Temple.

Sorry for that aside. Getting back on topic, once all 6 of the new temples anticipated to be completed next year are dedicated, the total number of dedicated temples will increase to 167. That means that roughly 40% of all operating temples will get a new president within the next 12-15 months, which makes sense, given that temple presidents serve for a period of roughly 3 years, so roughly 1/3 (or 33.33% of all temples) will have a new president announced each year. 

The new temple presidents announced during this year is slightly above that average, but when we subtract the 6 temples for which a dedication will not occur until next year, that means 161 temples will be in operation by this year's end, and that 60 temples will have new presidents start serving this year, and that works out to 37%, which is closer to the average I mentioned above.

That does it for my report of this development. But before I end in the usual way, I also wanted to mention what I have coming up on this blog in the near future. In addition to reporting important Church news and temple developments, which I monitor on an ongoing basis, my hope this weekend is to publish another update on the ages and tenure milestones of our current apostles in the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. I will also continue to fine-tune my General Conference predictions as needed. So if any of you want to comment on either of the posts I did on that subject recently, you can find the summary of what molded those predictions here, and the updated version of those predictions here. I will continue to accept comments on those predictions up until Monday October 1 (so I will have time to do any updates that are needed on them and post them here before General Conference weekend begins the following Saturday).

As always, I continue to monitor all Church news and temple developments and will try to bring word of those to you all here as I become aware of them. That does it for this post. Any and all comments on any post are, as always, welcome and appreciated at any time they are made. Thank you for the privilege of your time, and for wading through another lengthy post from me. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added content, please feel free to subscribe. Until my next post, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

Tuesday, September 18, 2018

Additional Church News Reported

Hello again, everyone! I wanted to post again now to share some additional Church news which has crossed my radar in the last couple of days. Let's get right into all of that. We start with stories from the Newsroom on the Church's official website. Yesterday, I reported that additional members of the general Young Women and Primary boards had been called. But apparently three new members have also been called to the Relief Society General Board. You can read more complete biographies of all of these newly-called board members here.

Second, as some of you may or may not be aware, Jacinda Ardern (the Prime Minister of New Zealand) is the niece of Elder Ian S. Ardern, who is serving in the Church's Pacific Area Presidency. He and his wife joined area president Elder O. Vincent Haleck in presenting PM Ardern with a compilation of her family history. Although the Prime Minister has not been personally involved with the Church for some time, she graciously accepted this gift. This continues the Church's ongoing tradition of presenting such histories to major leaders of the world.

Next, Relief Society General President Jean B. Bingham, joined by Sister Michelle D. Craig, First Counselor in the Young Women General Presidency, met with Chile's Minister of Women and Gender Equality, Isabel Plá. They spoke with her on the subject of eliminating gender discrimination and violence and the valuable role women have in society. The two Church leaders exchanged ideas with the Minister, particularly describing how the Church has emphasized the divine nature and vital role of women of all ages, and what the Church has done and continues to do to protect the women of the Church. More details, including a list of other articles describing the recent worldwide ministry efforts of the women of the Church, can be found in this article.

And the Newsroom also reported today some additional details about how clean-up efforts are underway after Typhoon Mangkut swept through Hong Kong and the Philippines. I don't know this for certain, but it is possible that any further progress towards a groundbreaking for the three temples announced in the Philippines (for Urdaneta, Muntinlupa City, and Cagayan de Oro) may be delayed until the aftermath of the storm is dealt with. I hope there will not be a delay, but it is possible. I will be keeping an eye on that aspect of things for sure.

Turning now to the Church News website, the Church has recently reemphasized the ongoing need and available opportunities for senior missionary couples. In light of that need, the Church News provided 5 suggestions for prospective senior missionary couples to remember as they are looking into the options that best suit their gifts and their situations. I would just interject here that without the loving leadership and labor provided by older couples, the work of the Church's Humanitarian program and many temples around the world (to name a few opportunities in which I have actually had experience) could not occur to the degree it does.

The Church News also marked the second anniversary of the dedication of the Philadelphia Pennsylvania Temple with a retrospective look back at the history of how the temple was years in the making. And as those in the southeastern United States continue to recover from the recent flooding, the local members of the Relief Society have mobilized to provide assistance.

It may just be my personal opinion, but I have noticed that there has seemed to be an increase this year, and especially in recent months, in the number of news stories about the way the women of the Church, both generally and locally, are making a difference. The Brethren of the Church have been very clear about the fact that the women of the Church have made very valuable contributions to the furthering of the work. It is very significant to me that the first address President Nelson gave as President of the Quorum of the Twelve was directed to the women of the Church.

Some may claim that the Church can and should do more to include women in the Church, but seem to overlook the fact that no major decision in recent years was ever made by the general Church leadership without extensive input from the women of the Church. That has been particularly true recently in the decision to replace home and visiting teaching with ministering, to consolidate the Priesthood and Women's Sessions of General Conference, and with the Come Follow Me curriculum. And we know that two of the general Women presidency members are on each of the three major Church councils, which is significant. Also, Priesthood Executive Committee meetings have been discontinued, with both male and female leaders in the ward meeting to discuss issues on an as-needed basis.

The Church continues to find ways to enhance the contributions of all women in the Church. But more than that, it has been correctly observed that women make up roughly half of the world's population and are mothers to the other half. It has been amazing and humbling for me to see what the Church continues to do to show women how valuable they are in the eyes of the Lord and to the Church as a whole.

I continue to monitor all Church news and temple developments and will pass word of those things along to you all as I become aware of them. That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated, on any post at any time. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added content, please feel free to subscribe. Until my next post, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

Monday, September 17, 2018

My Response to the Public Outcry Relating to Sam Young's Excommunication

Hello again, everyone! While I continue to welcome and appreciate any comments on any post I have previously done, and while I do not want to draw attention away from all the significant things that are happening in the Church, I wanted to take an opportunity to "sound off" in response to the somewhat vituperative public outcry against the Church in the matter of Sam Young's excommunication.

First, a review: Sam Young, a former bishop, raised some concerns he had about the Church's policies and procedures relating to interviewing youth and children. But he took the expression of his concerns to an unhealthy level, going on a "hunger strike" that lasted several weeks, and going so far as to say that he would not join the Church today knowing what he knows now, that he would discourage others from joining, and that the Church was willfully protecting those who were conducting themselves in a questionable manner. He further claimed to have a list of several hundred "highly inappropriate" questions which he said others had submitted to him based on their own experiences or that of their families in interviews with Church leaders.

When Sam Young received word that he had been excommunication through the action of a Church disciplinary council, despite his earlier expressed attitude about the climate of the Church and the fact that he would not join it today, and would discourage others from joining as well, he expressed bitter disappointment in his leaders' decision to excommunicate him. Although he lives out of state, he made a trip to the grounds of the Salt Lake Temple to read that letter aloud in front of a crowd. The letter said the reason for this action was his coming out in rebellion against the Church and its' leaders and not correcting course as he had repeatedly been invited to do so. But Young claimed that the one and only reason was his effort to protect the children and youth of the Church.

The action taken by his local leaders, on which the general Church leaders would not offer an opinion, has led to public outrage from many who side with his claim that he was just trying to protect children and youth, and say that if such questions as are on the list Young had were being asked in interviews, that would indeed be inappropriate. There was also outcry about the fact (as some claimed) that his local leaders took this action in retaliation for him having the courage to speak his mind. There were also claims that general Church leadership only changed their policies on children and youth interviews as a result of the concerns he expressed, so many wondered why that would lead to his excommunication.

I have so many problems with this whole scenario. First, the issue was not his efforts to protect the children and youth, but rather his remarks about discouraging others from joining and being ashamed to be a member of a Church that would allow the kind of questions on the list he had. He also publicly encouraged others to decline to sustain leaders of the Church.

Second, bishop's interviews are supposed to be confidential, and if anyone had a problem with any questions they were asked in any given interview, the proper way to handle the matter would be to take it up with the next leader in the chain of command in the Church. And if the questions tended to be the kind that would make someone uncomfortable, there are proper ways to handle that.

Third, although not many accounts had been previously shared the "uncomfortable and inappropriate" questions they allegedly been asked during such interviews, it was not until Young started actively campaigning for change on this issue that all of these people suddenly wanted to talk about inappropriate questions they had been asked. If such questions had been asked, and if these people were so bothered by it, why would nothing have been said about it until someone made a big issue of wanting the Church to act on it?

Fourth, the Church had clearly noted in official statements released about this issue that local and general leaders had met with him, reviewed his materials, taken time to understand his concerns, and counsel with him. But he still apparently decided that his protests on the issue would go forward and would bring the change he was expecting.

Fifth, his one big mistake (and that of those defending his actions) is in asserting that the Church did not change procedures until he started raising his concerns. But the Church has been very clear about the fact that when any concern or potential change in doctrine or policy is being considered, if any questions or scenarios arise about which the Brethren have limited or no experience, they solicit the opinion of qualified individuals in those fields to craft informed opinions in the decision-making process.

When mentioning the restructuring of Melchizedek Priesthood Quorums or the replacement of home and visiting teaching with ministering (both were implemented in April), President Nelson indicated that these changes had been "under study for many months". And a similar wording was used in the announcement in late October last year in which the Church noted that the Priesthood and Women's Session would both be held annually.

So for Young to have suggested that the changes to youth interviews were only made when he raised his concerns originally is in direct contradiction to the way things actually work when decisions are made and matters are considered on a general Church level. But the issue goes deeper than that. Some have claimed that for a Church that bears the Savior's name, it is very much contrary to the nature of Christ's character to kick someone out of His Church.

But the Lord has said in modern times that He "cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance", and His admonition during His mortal ministry was for people to "go [their ways] and sin no more." In addition to that, Joseph Smith said this about those who oppose Church policies and its' leaders: "“I will give you one of the Keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom. It is an eternal principle, that has existed with God from all eternity: That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”

And at a time when apostates in Kirtland tried to suggest that Joseph Smith was a fallen prophet and to put someone else in his place, Brigham Young was quoted as follows: "I rose up, and in a plain and forcible manner told them that Joseph was a Prophet and I knew it, and that they might rail and slander him as much as they pleased, [but] they could not destroy the appointment of the Prophet of God; they could only destroy their own authority, cut the thread that bound them to the Prophet and to God, and sink themselves to hell. Many were highly enraged at my decided opposition to their measures."

Following the release of the first Manifesto (which was an official call to end the practice polygamy), Wilford Woodruff said the following: "The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty."

The Lord, through Joseph Smith, further said: "When we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or 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."

I might add that, based on these quotes, the fact that Sam Young kept asserting that his position should be taken more seriously than the official positions of the Church made after thorough consideration of the relevant concerns, and the fact that he persisted in behavior contrary to the counsel of the local and general leaders with whom he met suggests that, despite his previous service as a bishop, he has no understanding of the way Church policies are crafted, and demonstrated a lack of effort to change his behavior and a lack of respect for the counsel of his leaders relating to this issue.

Therefore, the argument that this action was somewhat uncalled for and unjustified seems to me to be somewhat disingenuous at best and blatantly ignorant at worst. Some also claimed that questioning one's leaders would result in one's excommunication without exception. But when the way in which that questioning occurs involves advocating a widespread rejection of the leaders the Lord has called to serve or implying that oneself or a group of individuals knows more about the Lord's will for His Church than those appointed leaders, or suggesting a boycott and rejection of the Church and the doctrines thereof, a line has to be drawn to indicate that is not correct behavior.

I hope that Sam Young will have the sense to realize his error in this matter and will eventually reconcile with the Church and want to rejoin, but part of me has a hard time seeing that as a real possibility given what happened and the way it happened. I want to apologize for getting up on my soapbox about this, but the attitudes that led to this situation unfolding the way it did, along with those who have been so quick to find fault with the way local and general Church leaders handled this issue, really bothers me.

I also hope that the perspective and additional context I have provided on this issue here is helpful to at least some of you who will read it. That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added content, please feel free to subscribe. Until my next post, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

Additional Church News Reported

Hello again, everyone! The Church News has reported three new developments recently. President Nelson spent his time in British Columbia sharing advice with parents as they continue to raise their children in an ever-changing world. Following the devotional held in Washington, 31 twitter posts highlighted the hashtag "followtheprophet". And  11 female Church members have been called to serve on the Primary and Young Women General Boards.

But perhaps the most significant Church-related development was one reported earlier today by the Church News. Church leaders (the First Presidency in particular) are recommending a special session should be held for the Utah State Legislature before the end of this year to regulate the legalization of medical marijuana in Utah.

As I previously noted, the Church is not opposed to the use of medical marijuana, and recognizes the benefits that many would get from having it available. The problem is and always has been the wording of the current initiative going on the ballot for Utahns this November, as there are too many loopholes that would not regulate it sufficiently and would open the possibility that it could be used recreationally by some people, with no penalties in place if that were to happen.

But the Church all along has said that many people would benefit from legal marijuana use, and that if an appropriate measure could be approved, the Church would get behind it. Although the Church remains politically neutral in relation to candidates, they have called on governments at various times to act on various issues. So the suggestion for a special session of the Utah legislature is in line with the Church's tradition of seeing a need and suggesting the most appropriate way to approach the issue. You can read more about that here.

I continue to monitor any and all Church news and temple developments and will do my level best to pass those along to you all as I receive word of them. That does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added content, please feel free to subscribe. Until my next post, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.