The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a theocracy. Simply stated, a theocracy is an entity ruled or governed by God. This Church was established in these last days through the hand of Jesus Christ under the direction of His Father, Elohim, as was the case in other dispensations. As its head, the Lord directs the work of His Church through revelation to its leaders and to its membership. This writing will be concerned with the two forms of revelation directed towards the Church’s leaders at all levels.
The earthly activities of the LDS Church are directed by those who have been called through proper priesthood authority to perform specific duties. At all levels of the organization, the members work to magnify their callings by seeking to do the will of the Lord in order that the Church might fulfill its earthly mission. Those in authority receive revelation from God as to whom He would have serve in any particular calling or assignment under their direction at any given time. Once a member has been called to serve and accepts the new responsibility, the member must be sustained by those over whom he or she will exercise authority. This process of the members sustaining their leaders is known as common consent. Central to the notion of common consent is the understanding that the exercise of personal agency on the part of every member is necessary for that member to make eternal progress. It is understood that callings come from the Lord by inspiration, and the responsibility of the membership of the Church is to sustain His will when called upon to do so. Thus common consent is not a process whereby the membership approves the choices of the Lord but rather gives their assent that they will support those who have been called in their respective assignments.
I sense that an air of familiarity and imprecision is creeping into Church member relations and the conducting of some Church meetings at the local level that is inconsistent with the manner in which business and the meetings themselves are conducted by General Authorities as illustrated in the broadcast sessions of General Conference. In other meetings throughout the world where General Authorities are present and thus presiding, the business of the Church proceeds with precision and decorum. The slackening of traditional formality in many of our meetings today is likely in part a result of a rapidly expanding worldwide Church. Unlike the situation a few decades ago, priesthood training is left more and more to the stakes as fewer stake conferences and their attendant leadership sessions are presided over by a General Authority. Some effects of this situation are becoming apparent in our day. In light of this, more time might be profitably spent training leaders to conduct ward and stake business with greater aplomb.
When those in authority ask the membership under their direction to exercise their right of common consent by sustaining members in their new callings, there is a proper manner in which this action should proceed. Those in the congregation on such occasions are not a party to the calling or release of a specific member. Thus, it is incorrect for the officer conducting the business at hand to say “We are calling or releasing Brother or Sister so and so,” etc. The member has already been called or released by their Priesthood leader. The membership is being asked to sustain the member in their new calling or to provide a vote of thanks for someone who has served and has been released in fact. An example of the proper phraseology might be, “Brother Smith has been called to serve as the Ward Sunday School President. Those of you who will sustain him in this calling,” etc. Recently, I attended a Sacrament Meeting in which the members in attendance were asked to sustain a brother as a “high council representative.” Such a calling does not exist in this Church. The brother should have been sustained “as a member of the Stake High Council.” Some may think that these are small points. Possibly they are, but such distinctions may often make the difference between being right or wrong.
One additional thought on this general topic. We belong to a Church the business of which proceeds through the process of callings and assignments, not one of volunteering. Classroom teachers ask for volunteers to offer the appropriate prayers when they should ask someone specifically to do so. Priesthood leaders seek volunteers to handle assignments rather than making specific assignments. Asking for volunteers is obviously easier than seeking the inspiration necessary to make inspired assignments, and that very likely is the reason that asking for volunteers is becoming more and more the pattern. Asking for volunteers is not proper in almost all cases when we might be inclined to do so.
The other means by which the Lord directs His Church is through revelation or what some might be more inclined to call inspiration. The right of common consent does not include the power to determine what is true revelation and what is not. Those who have been sustained in a calling of authority have the right and the responsibility to receive the revelation or inspiration necessary to magnify their calling and provide the leadership that is expected. The members who have sustained their leaders also have a responsibility to put their sustaining vote into action by actively supporting their leaders and following their directions. Only by doing so, may the Lord direct His Church through these properly called and sustained authorities in these difficult times in such a manner that the members of the Church may prepare for their Savior’s triumphal second coming.
No comments:
Post a Comment