Page 1 of 1
The Calling of Bishops
Posted: September 8th, 2018, 1:55 pm
by Dusty52
I've been in many wards
In my experience bishops are called for 2 reasons
First for them to help and serve others
Secondly for their own personal growth and learning
Heaven help the ward if it's no 2
Anyone have any views on this?
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: September 8th, 2018, 2:07 pm
by EmmaLee
I've had at least 12 bishops over the years (probably more, but that many readily come to mind). The vast majority (if not all) of them, in my opinion, were put in that position because they were good managers, good administrators, well organized, and were either outgoing or knew how to talk to people, and/or were well-liked by ward members. I can only think of one bishop I've ever had (from when I was a young single adult) who I believe was called because he had an amazing spirit (or in other words, he was called for spiritual reasons rather than practical reasons). This has been my experience with bishops. Your mileage may vary.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: September 8th, 2018, 2:32 pm
by Robin Hood
The calling of a bishop often demonstrates that God clearly has a sense of humour.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: September 8th, 2018, 2:37 pm
by ElizaRSkousen
Robin Hood wrote: ↑September 8th, 2018, 2:32 pm
The calling of a bishop often demonstrates that God clearly has a sense of humour.
I dont think God literally gives every calling.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: September 8th, 2018, 5:40 pm
by PressingForward
One things for sure, never knew a poor Bishop, or Stake President.
I was a bishop because there were not any other options
Posted: September 8th, 2018, 5:43 pm
by BYULAWGUY
The one after me and been divorced and was living in a trailer park
(The ward doesn't exist anymore. There were a few bishops in the stake receiving welfare)
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: September 8th, 2018, 11:43 pm
by BeNotDeceived
PressingForward wrote: ↑September 8th, 2018, 5:40 pm
One things for sure, never knew a poor Bishop, or Stake President.
My favorite bishop was a bus driver.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: September 9th, 2018, 6:13 am
by oriagain14
PressingForward wrote: ↑September 8th, 2018, 5:40 pm
One things for sure, never knew a poor Bishop, or Stake President.
Me either.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: September 9th, 2018, 9:11 am
by Robin Hood
PressingForward wrote: ↑September 8th, 2018, 5:40 pm
One things for sure, never knew a poor Bishop, or Stake President.
You do now.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: September 11th, 2018, 12:33 pm
by Michelle
PressingForward wrote: ↑September 8th, 2018, 5:40 pm
One things for sure, never knew a poor Bishop, or Stake President.
I have. 2 at least.
Since bishops are called from a geographical area, poor areas may have poor bishops.
As a side note: I would question most people's assumptions of poor and rich.
I know that many people assume my family is poor. We have a lot of kids and live in a modest home.
However, I often tell my kids, "We are the richest people on the block because we have not debt." (We did buy a house a few years ago, so now we have that debt, but still, compared to most of our up to debt in their eyeball high living neighbors. . .
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: September 11th, 2018, 8:30 pm
by brianj
Another missionary on my mission was eventually called as a bishop. While serving in that calling he began an affair.
I used to know someone who had been disfellowshipped shortly before his bishop was released. The new bishop didn't care about him at all, expressing that since he had been disfellowshipped he wasn't worth the time. This bishop announced his calling was to serve the youth and generally neglected the adults in his ward until he was released.
In one ward we had a bishop who was afraid of offending anybody, partly because people had left the ward after claiming they had been offended. The ward was in such bad shape that the subsequent bishop was someone who had previously served as a stake president and was very sharp when needed.
I have had some great bishops who set an example that I want to be like. Bad bishops are, thankfully, few and far between. But they are out there.
On the original subject, I believe every bishop I have had was called to help and serve others AND for the personal growth.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 2nd, 2023, 3:55 pm
by BeNotDeceived
oriagain14 wrote: ↑September 9th, 2018, 6:13 am
PressingForward wrote: ↑September 8th, 2018, 5:40 pm
One things for sure, never knew a poor Bishop, or Stake President.
Me either.
Briefly my Bishop was a bus driver.
Very cool ward put us through the temple.
Then reorganized and new dude was a complete jerk.
Then the 299th RCS was BRAC’d so I ran away to Saipan for seven years.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 2nd, 2023, 3:59 pm
by Cruiserdude
BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2023, 3:55 pm
oriagain14 wrote: ↑September 9th, 2018, 6:13 am
PressingForward wrote: ↑September 8th, 2018, 5:40 pm
One things for sure, never knew a poor Bishop, or Stake President.
Me either.
Briefly my Bishop was a bus driver.
Very cool ward put us through the temple.
Then reorganized and new dude was a complete jerk.
Then the 299th RCS was BRAC’d so I ran away to Saipan for seven years.
The king of necro-thread revival!!
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 2nd, 2023, 4:09 pm
by mtmom
One of my favorite branch presidents was from a town 30 minutes away, not even in the branch boundaries. He was older and had a problem remembering what callings needed to be filled or followed up on. As I got to know him, I discovered he had a good heart. He loved everyone and was interested in getting to know the branch members. He and his sweet wife have remained good friends to this day.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 2nd, 2023, 5:10 pm
by Niemand
One of our former bishops is a school teacher and very proud of his working class roots.
In these parts we have a much smaller pool of committed members to choose from.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 2nd, 2023, 6:12 pm
by Craig Johnson
I have had a lot of bishops over the years, since 1974, the year I joined. One of them became my father-in-law. I can't find much common ground amongst them. Some were very sociable, a few were only there when they had to be. Some were stalwart, some fell away. Some were old, some were very young, most were middle-aged. Some were tall, some were short. Some were fat, a few were lean. Some were quite wealthy, some were well off, some were getting by. Most were married, one was not. Some of them were humble, a couple were braggadocio. The one that bothered me the most was in LE. He was always bragging about how beautiful his wife was. Not long after his release he cheated on his wife and then married the gal he cheated with. His poor wife was so traumatized that she would not even talk to me, I guess thinking I wanted something that I did not want. The worst branch president I ever had was just a callous and unfeeling jerk, in my opinion. But, on the other hand and mainly, the bishops of wards I was in were kindly, generous with their time, devoted, knew the scriptures fairly well and had one thing in common, now that I think about it - they were patient. None of the bishops I had, to my knowledge were related to any of the old, original Prophet Joseph Smith time families.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 2nd, 2023, 9:17 pm
by briznian
It seems to me that my bishops have been a reflection of the stake presidents who called them.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 2nd, 2023, 9:31 pm
by BeNotDeceived
briznian wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2023, 9:17 pm
It seems to me that my bishops have been a reflection of the stake presidents who called them.
The one StakePres, that I knew must of been a multiple personality.
He called me bus driver buddy guy and the bankster from hell.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 3rd, 2023, 2:30 am
by Rumpelstiltskin
I'm a bit cynical, but I doubt there's very little to do with discernment involved in calling some poor sod to be a bishop...unless you consider being successful, educated, popular, and groomed as using discernment.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 3rd, 2023, 2:35 am
by Robin Hood
Craig Johnson wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2023, 6:12 pm
I have had a lot of bishops over the years, since 1974, the year I joined. One of them became my father-in-law. I can't find much common ground amongst them. Some were very sociable, a few were only there when they had to be. Some were stalwart, some fell away. Some were old, some were very young, most were middle-aged. Some were tall, some were short. Some were fat, a few were lean. Some were quite wealthy, some were well off, some were getting by. Most were married, one was not. Some of them were humble, a couple were braggadocio. The one that bothered me the most was in LE. He was always bragging about how beautiful his wife was. Not long after his release he cheated on his wife and then married the gal he cheated with. His poor wife was so traumatized that she would not even talk to me, I guess thinking I wanted something that I did not want. The worst branch president I ever had was just a callous and unfeeling jerk, in my opinion. But, on the other hand and mainly, the bishops of wards I was in were kindly, generous with their time, devoted, knew the scriptures fairly well and had one thing in common, now that I think about it - they were patient. None of the bishops I had, to my knowledge were related to any of the old, original Prophet Joseph Smith time families.
I joined the Church the same year as you - 1974.
I'm intrigued by your statement that one of your bishops was unmarried. I was under the impression that being married was an absolute prerequisite.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 3rd, 2023, 3:59 am
by Niemand
Robin Hood wrote: ↑January 3rd, 2023, 2:35 am
Craig Johnson wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2023, 6:12 pm
I have had a lot of bishops over the years, since 1974, the year I joined. One of them became my father-in-law. I can't find much common ground amongst them. Some were very sociable, a few were only there when they had to be. Some were stalwart, some fell away. Some were old, some were very young, most were middle-aged. Some were tall, some were short. Some were fat, a few were lean. Some were quite wealthy, some were well off, some were getting by. Most were married, one was not. Some of them were humble, a couple were braggadocio. The one that bothered me the most was in LE. He was always bragging about how beautiful his wife was. Not long after his release he cheated on his wife and then married the gal he cheated with. His poor wife was so traumatized that she would not even talk to me, I guess thinking I wanted something that I did not want. The worst branch president I ever had was just a callous and unfeeling jerk, in my opinion. But, on the other hand and mainly, the bishops of wards I was in were kindly, generous with their time, devoted, knew the scriptures fairly well and had one thing in common, now that I think about it - they were patient. None of the bishops I had, to my knowledge were related to any of the old, original Prophet Joseph Smith time families.
I joined the Church the same year as you - 1974.
I'm intrigued by your statement that one of your bishops was unmarried. I was under the impression that being married was an absolute prerequisite.
Isn't there some obscure loophole about ethnic Jews? Never heard of it being used though.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 3rd, 2023, 5:01 am
by Robin Hood
Niemand wrote: ↑January 3rd, 2023, 3:59 am
Robin Hood wrote: ↑January 3rd, 2023, 2:35 am
Craig Johnson wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2023, 6:12 pm
I have had a lot of bishops over the years, since 1974, the year I joined. One of them became my father-in-law. I can't find much common ground amongst them. Some were very sociable, a few were only there when they had to be. Some were stalwart, some fell away. Some were old, some were very young, most were middle-aged. Some were tall, some were short. Some were fat, a few were lean. Some were quite wealthy, some were well off, some were getting by. Most were married, one was not. Some of them were humble, a couple were braggadocio. The one that bothered me the most was in LE. He was always bragging about how beautiful his wife was. Not long after his release he cheated on his wife and then married the gal he cheated with. His poor wife was so traumatized that she would not even talk to me, I guess thinking I wanted something that I did not want. The worst branch president I ever had was just a callous and unfeeling jerk, in my opinion. But, on the other hand and mainly, the bishops of wards I was in were kindly, generous with their time, devoted, knew the scriptures fairly well and had one thing in common, now that I think about it - they were patient. None of the bishops I had, to my knowledge were related to any of the old, original Prophet Joseph Smith time families.
I joined the Church the same year as you - 1974.
I'm intrigued by your statement that one of your bishops was unmarried. I was under the impression that being married was an absolute prerequisite.
Isn't there some obscure loophole about ethnic Jews? Never heard of it being used though.
A direct descendant of Aaron can serve as a bishop without counsellors.
Re: The Calling of Bishops
Posted: January 3rd, 2023, 10:39 am
by Craig Johnson
Robin Hood wrote: ↑January 3rd, 2023, 2:35 am
Craig Johnson wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2023, 6:12 pm
I have had a lot of bishops over the years, since 1974, the year I joined. One of them became my father-in-law. I can't find much common ground amongst them. Some were very sociable, a few were only there when they had to be. Some were stalwart, some fell away. Some were old, some were very young, most were middle-aged. Some were tall, some were short. Some were fat, a few were lean. Some were quite wealthy, some were well off, some were getting by. Most were married, one was not. Some of them were humble, a couple were braggadocio. The one that bothered me the most was in LE. He was always bragging about how beautiful his wife was. Not long after his release he cheated on his wife and then married the gal he cheated with. His poor wife was so traumatized that she would not even talk to me, I guess thinking I wanted something that I did not want. The worst branch president I ever had was just a callous and unfeeling jerk, in my opinion. But, on the other hand and mainly, the bishops of wards I was in were kindly, generous with their time, devoted, knew the scriptures fairly well and had one thing in common, now that I think about it - they were patient. None of the bishops I had, to my knowledge were related to any of the old, original Prophet Joseph Smith time families.
I joined the Church the same year as you - 1974.
I'm intrigued by your statement that one of your bishops was unmarried. I was under the impression that being married was an absolute prerequisite.
I guess I should have mentioned he was a widower, so technically was married, but alone. I think you are right, that they do have to have been or are married.
