Tuesday, November 27, 2012

Why The 'Intellectual Reserve' Copyright'?

Why does the LDS Church have an "Intellectual Reserve, Inc." copyright on its manuals and other publications?
This name replaced "Corporation of the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" at the beginning of the 21st Century, likely around 2001 or 2002.
Nothing to worry about here.
A bunch of church attorneys chose the name and  purely for  legal reasons to keep up with the times.
Despite the "Sunstone-ish" sounding copyright, there's nothing to read into here.

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 

Friday, November 16, 2012

Can You Resign From a Church Calling?

Can you actually resign from an LDS Church calling or position?
Most members might say no, but there is a historical precedent for a resignation taking place.
On Oct. 6, 1946, Joseph Fielding Smith (the less well-known leader with that name, that was not the president of the church), submitted his resignation as patriarch to the church.
Although some more contemporary sources state that he was "released," he did submit his resignation for the calling to the First Presidency.
The newer Church News Almanacs state he was released, but the older almanacs confirm his resignation.
So, there you have it, for whatever it may mean, at least one church member did resign from a major calling and his resignation was accepted.
(Eldred G. Smith, the seventh and last patriarch of the church, replaced Joseph Fielding Smith. Eldred was put on emeritus status eventually.)

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

Saturday, November 10, 2012

Why Church Members Go Inactive ...



Why do some members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints go inactive?

It boils down to a lack of testimony and conviction, but often the spark to stop going to church is some negative experience -- usually with a church leader.
A bishop offended or embarrassed the member somehow.
In the case of one of my grandfathers, he traded his two prize plow horses to a friend, who was also his bishop, for a tractor. The machine broke down almost immediately and was no good. So, he took offense and stopped attending church. This continued for decades and he sadly passed away, being inactive.
In the case of one teenager, his bishop stopped him from attending his seminary graduation for a minor sell-confessed moral problem. He took offense that he missed a once-in-a-lifetime event. He was also upset that the prior year, two older boys in the ward did graduate from seminary, even though they stole yearbooks from the local high school and were prevented from attending their own high school graduation. He stopped going to church. His circle of friends even switched to less active members or even non-members.
In another case, a man in his mid-30s went inactive in the late 1970s for something his bishop did. It seemed like the man could not even recall exactly what the bishop did, but he was still mad about it and hadn't been to church since then. That former bishop has long since passed away and about a dozen bishops have served in the ward since then.
For still another case, a man in his late 50s, a smoker and inactive for many years, tried to come to church regularly five years ago. However, he could not stop smoking and said felt like an outcast at church, because of his smoking habit and within a few months he stopped coming again.
These tales are sad.
I'm not saying things that what church leaders do is the only cause of inactivity, but it is certainly one of the key causes. I'm also certain no church leaders plan to drive any members inactive, it just happens with human failings. Yet, I'm also certain church leaders probably work on missionary opportunities a lot and probably mostly ignore the negative -- that things they do could drive someone way from the church.
Obviously in many cases, members are perhaps looking for things to take offense at.
Someone once said that Sampson killed a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass. Sadly, the testimony of some members today is killed the same way.
Once a person stops attending church and doing what they should, their testimony decreases.
Still, this illustrates the grave consequences -- good or bad -- that church leaders can have on members' lives.
Church leaders could strive to be more sensitive to avoid doing things that members could take offense at. There is no way to avoid all such offenses, as some are silly and overblown, but bishops who are too strict and on a letter of the law crusade -- may do some serious damage -- especially to young adults.
I feel that some people, who are inactive, may not be forthcoming and also don't want to seem so shallow by revealing their true reason for going inactive -- that someone offended them.
So, they hide behind some so-called church history inconsistency, or similar things as their stated reasons.
They want to appear intellectual, but in reality are nothing of the sort ...
In 30 years of meeting inactive members in my stake, when I get people to really open up, the spark or cause of their inactivity can more often than ANY OTHER reason be traced to taking offense at what some leader or member did or said.
That's a sad reason for a substantial amount of inactivity, but still true.

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

World's Toughest Mission (For Converts)?

What is the toughest mission to serve in for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
A lot depends on how you define "tough."
However, if you define it as how many average converts a missionary baptizes during his/her mission, then I'd peg my mission, England-Bristol, as thee toughest, and at the least one of the toughest of all.
In fact, I'd put ALL of Europe in the toughest in the world category.
I'd estimate the average missionary in the U.K. or Europe only baptizes a few or a handful of converts in two years of service.
Furthermore, England Bristol doesn't even exist as a mission anymore.
Whereas in Central and South America in particular, missions have been divided and multiplied many times over the decades, there are actually LESS missions in the United Kingdom today than in the 1970s.
Missionaries were also "chewed out" in the early 1990s by a regional leader for their low baptism numbers. Eleven years later, in 2002, the mission was disbanded and merged with two adjoining missions.
(In addition to being tough for converts, this mission is also among the most expensive in all the world -- though costs missionaries pay are equalized world-wide, except for couples.)

--ALL of Europe is in a steep religious decline overall.
In fact, the England Bristol Mission ceased to exist on July 1, 2002, after some 40 years of existence. The England London mission gained part of the former Bristol mission and the England Birmingham mission received the rest.
Where else in the world are you going to find LESS missions in existence and likely less full-time missionaries serving, except in the United Kingdom and Europe?
The "why" this may be so is another story.


               (Above photograph is from Bradford, England, a circa year 1300 A.D.  building.)

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.