Home Teaching the Bishop - A Lesson Learned on Contention

[_sethpayne]

Along with several other families in my ward, it is my privilege to home teach the Bishop’s family. My Bishop is a kind and wonderful man and has had this calling for just about 6 months now.

As most of you know I am agnostic-to-“probably not” on most of the Church’s specific truth claims. Regardless, I enjoy and embrace my fellowship with my fellow brothers and sisters and will always be a Latter-day Saint. In any case, I wanted to share a little about the experience I had home teaching the Bishop’s family this week as we approach Easter.

This past Thursday I, along with a substitute companion (my regular companion is traveling on business), visited the Bishop’s family to share a message about Easter, Jesus’ ministry, and ultimate sacrifice as described in the Book of John. We focused our discussion on John 17 where Jesus’ pleads with the Father to sanctify his disciples as well as those who believe their words. Jesus also asks that the collective of believers be made “one” as a sign of their Christian discipleship and as a sign that the Father did, indeed, send Jesus into the world.

When I asked the Bishop what he thought it meant that all disciples become “one” he immediately cited 3rd Nephi where Jesus gives the command that there should be no contention amongst the disciples (in this particular case regarding the manner of baptism). The Bishop then relayed how there are many times when he has discussed various topics, both in the Church setting and in day-to-day life, where there has been disagreement between participants in the conversation. He then relayed how different the experience is when participants choose to avoid contention and seek commonalities compared to the unproductive and ego-driven discussion where contention abounds. He said that becoming “one” as disciples means avoiding contention and approaching disagreements in love and with great charity. I was very inspired by my Bishop’s insight and his words very much pushed me to write this blog post on the subject of John 17:

http://www.sethpayne.com/?p=979

Disagreement and discussion can be uplifting and inspiring as it is through non-contentious discourse that we all learn from each other and, in my view, have an opportunity to gain significant wisdom. Conversely, contentious disagreement where rather than engage in substantive discourse we resort to rhetorical jabs; while not without short-term entertainment value, is ultimately hurtful and unproductive. I know this, of course, because I have often been a participant in dishing out and receiving these rhetorical jabs.

In any case, I thought I would share my thoughts on the subject given the renewed discussion both here, and elsewhere on the role of liberal, agnostic, ex-, and “total believing” Latter-day Saints within the Church.

[_Joseph]

It is much easier to avoid contention when you know you are not being lied to.

lds-inc would have much fewer problems if they avoided this practice.

[_bcspace]

It is much easier to avoid contention when you know you are not being lied to.

lds-inc would have much fewer problems if they avoided this practice.

I suppose I could tell you who's really doing the lying, but that would be matching contention with contention.

In any case, I thought I would share my thoughts on the subject given the renewed discussion both here, and elsewhere on the role of liberal, agnostic, ex-, and “total believing” Latter-day Saints within the Church.

Good and useful words for sure, but at some point they don't apply, especially in situations where values and truth are being compromised.

[_DrW]

I suppose I could tell you who's really doing the lying, but that would be matching contention with contention.

Surely you are not claiming that the LDS Church has not lied to its members and prospective members.

[_bcspace]

I suppose I could tell you who's really doing the lying, but that would be matching contention with contention.

Surely you are not claiming that the LDS Church has not lied to its members and prospective members.

Surely you're not claiming they did?

[_Joseph]

Surely you are not claiming that the LDS Church has not lied to its members and prospective members.


Surely you're not claiming they did?

*****************************************

Go no further than reading the missionary discussions you were given to teach investigators. If you can say honestly that they do not contain lies then you are one deluded fool. Lies of omission and commission both.

I have the older lessons from the 1960's and the current set. Partial truth at best.

[_bcspace]

Go no further than reading the missionary discussions you were given to teach investigators. If you can say honestly that they do not contain lies then you are one deluded fool.

Proverbs 29:20

Lies of omission and commission both.

Neither commision or omission, though I partially sympathize with your omission claim in that I think investigators should learn and prove themselves for at least a year.

[_harmony]

Neither commision or omission, though I partially sympathize with your omission claim in that I think investigators should learn and prove themselves for at least a year.

Perhaps it would be more efficient if the church followed the Catholic church's lead, and required a year of study (of the entire church--doctrine, history, warts and all) prior to allowing baptism.

[_bcspace]

Perhaps it would be more efficient if the church followed the Catholic church's lead, and required a year of study (of the entire church--doctrine, history, warts and all) prior to allowing baptism.

It's not a very efficient way of gaining converts. The Church believes and I also can agree that if someone is converted by the Spirit then none of these other things matter. The inefficient route of year long study is easier on the rest of us.

The way to combine the best of both worlds, imho, is for the Church to go after liberals and other unbelievers and get them out of the Church or actually converted. In so doing, you don't have as much erroneous teaching that one can still believe and do or believe that which is contrary to doctrine and still be a member in good standing. To some degree, I see that beginning to happen.

[_ludwigm]

Perhaps it would be more efficient if the church followed the Catholic church's lead, and required a year of study (of the entire church--doctrine, history, warts and all) prior to allowing baptism.

Perhaps it would be more efficient if the church followed the Catholic church's lead, and required a level of college/university of study (of the entire church--doctrine, history, warts and all) prior to allowing make one a priest.
.
Or make one a bishop.
Or call one as prophet, seer and revelator.
Or for translators - I remember something about different and problematic translations - a crash-course in hebrew, greek, aramaic, and last but not least English.

Perhaps it would be more efficient ...

It's not a very efficient way of gaining converts.

Is gaining converts the main goal of The Church? If it is, then please declare it...

The Church believes and I also can agree

tautology (tô-tŏl'ə-jē)
n., pl., -gies.
1.
1. Needless repetition of the same sense in different words; redundancy.
2. An instance of such repetition.
2. Logic. An empty or vacuous statement.