Letter to Clark detailing some
of my experiences in the church. June 6, 1998
Dear Clark,
Since
you are my son and there is a relationship of trust and understanding I would
like to share a few thoughts with you, not to be taken as suggestions or looked
upon as revelation, but merely musings of someone who has been along the path
some years ago and has learned by experiences in a different time and different
setting than at present. Some time ago
the church presented a filmstrip in which the subject of listening was
discussed. I have often thought on the
principle that it was trying to present.
I don’t quite remember it verbatim, but the thing that I do remember was
that a friend listens and then like the farmer who takes the full head of wheat
in his hand, rubs it and with a gentle breath blows the chaff away. We should listen and not be critical or
respond to everything, but take everything, mull it over and with a gentle
breath blow the chaff away and consider the wheat that is left. I am giving you, more than likely, much chaff
in my musings, but I feel that for me it will be a therapeutic exercise for my
soul, and once having said it can be forgotten.
I
served as a high councilor from September to December in 1968. I had little experience with church
government and leadership before that time.
I had served as General Secretary of the Aaronic Priesthood Adult as it
was called in those days. I served in
the University student ward under Bishop Oscar McConkie and also in the
University Stake Married Student Ward under Bishop Graham Doxey. At that time there was no ward council, no
PEC meeting and no personal stewardship interviews. I was given a lesson manual and told to teach
and activate. I do not feel that I was
really very successful at either to this day.
I certainly did not learn much about priesthood administration. I just did “my duty”, but never learned my
duty.
I
served for less that a year as counselor in the Elders Quorum presidency in the
Ensign Third Ward. I was in my last year
of my pediatric residency at that time.
I felt a bit inadequate and really don’t remember much about the
experience. I remember that the home
teaching program and the family home evening programs were introduced at that
time and I was impressed with them.
We
moved to Lander and I was called by the Bishop to teach the Priests
Quorum. I really enjoyed doing
that. I thought that the best job in the
church was teaching the Priests Quorum.
Early in the following spring I was called into the stake Young Men’s
Presidency. I found it somewhat
frustrating, because I was not able to fully do what was expected of me because
I was then delivering babies and could not stray too far from Lander to go on
the stake activities, and they had a stake dance once a month.
We
moved to Lemoore, California on the Navy base in July of 1966. The first Sunday that we went to church the
ward clerk came to me and ask us to go with him to the clerk’s office to fill
out information so that our membership records could be requested. We also were interviewed by the bishop. He said that we would have callings as soon
as our membership records arrived. Later
the bishop told me this story. The ward
needed a General Secretary for the Aaronic Priesthood Adult. They had been looking for one for months and
did not find one. The counselors kept
encouraging the bishop to call one and he seemed to keep dragging his
feet. One Sunday in Bishopric meeting
the bishop told his counselors that the Lord had prepared someone to come to the
area and was sending him and to be patient.
When we were interviewed the bishop knew who that was to be and when our
records arrived, he called me in and issued the call. I had this calling twice before and did not
appreciate it and did not like it and had it not been for my training in the
church would have refused it. I remember
telling your mother that I disliked the position so much that I was going to do
the job so well that the Lord would never call me to that position again. As it happened soon after I left California
the church introduced the prospective elder program and the responsibility fell
to the president of the Elder’s Quorum.
As
I look back at those two years, I can see that they were not only a spiritual
preparation for me, but an administrative preparation as well. I learned about church councils and I could
watch the administration of the ward at a level that I had never seen
before. We had a good bishop who was an
able administrator and a spiritual man.
We got along well together, and I felt that he was my friend. I read what material there was to read on my
duties and responsibilities. I prepared
Sunday lessons for the members of the Adult Aaronic Priesthood, which we taught
during priesthood meeting. I attended
Priesthood Executive Committee meeting and Correlation Council meeting. Then the bishop asked me to teach a temple
preparation seminar. In those days it
was called Project Temple. He called and
interviewed some couples to attend the seminars to be held at his home on
Sunday evening. Some of the men were
inactive or partially active Elders who had never been to the temple and some
were from my Adult Aaronic group.
The
people who came were choice people. They
were committed by the bishop to attend and honored that commitment. I do not recall how many people were in the
first group, but I think it was four couples.
The bishop’s wife prepared refreshments for afterward and I gave the lessons
that were outlined. I prepared and
although I don’t remember so much at the time that I did it, I think that I
taught by the spirit and with conviction and testimony. I studied the lessons and presented them in a
way that they could be understood. Each
week the bishop would take one of the couples in for an interview while the
others were having refreshments. He
would resolve concerns and ask them about their progress toward the
temple. We seemed to work well together,
and the group became close friends. At
the conclusion of the seminar we went to the temple in Oakland and the couples
received their endowments and were sealed.
After
the first seminar the bishop told me he never had to ask people to go to the
seminar again. Members of the ward would
come to him and ask him if they could not go to the seminar so they could go to
the temple. The members of the first
group stood up in testimony meeting at various times and bore testimony about
the effect of the seminar and the temple in their lives. The ward and the stake was strengthened,
because many of them were called to positions of leadership and
responsibility. There followed
thereafter a series of seminars. I do
not recall how many. Some were more successful
than others, but the lives of many were blessed and even those who did not
eventually end up in the temple at the conclusion had a better understanding of
the church and the gospel than they did when they started. I have taught those seminars later in my
life, but I think that none were as effective as at that time. You mother and I went together and even though
it meant leaving our children at home with a babysitter on Sunday evening it
was a strengthening influence in our life.
I
was first introduced to stake priesthood leadership meeting in California. I enjoyed going to the meetings and being
instructed in my duties. The stake
president asked each of the General Secretaries of Aaronic Priesthood Adult to
work with the members and try to get 5% of the number advanced to the
Melchizedek Priesthood. The first year
we were able to double that number. The
second year we were asked to get 10% of those who held the Aaronic Priesthood
to advance to the Melchizedek Priesthood.
We were again able to double that number. We were fortunate indeed to be so
blessed. I feel that the Lord prepared
those people and that we were only instruments in his hands to bring his
children to a knowledge of the covenants of the temple. I really looked forward to stake priesthood
meetings. It seemed to be exciting in a
way. As I look back upon it, I don’t
remember that it was ever dull or boring.
I don’t know whether it was just my enthusiasm or whether it was the
spirit there.
I
left Lemoore and returned to Lander to serve.
I don’t know what I was called to do when I came back, but I was asked
to teach seminary and then in September I was called to serve on the high
council. I had not been instructed as to
the duties of a high counselor. I was
just told when and where to show up. I
was given a handbook of instruction and so I read it. I read the Aaronic priesthood handbook,
because I was assigned to the Aaronic Priesthood committee and given the
assignment of the Riverton Ward. I was
told to visit the ward and so I did. I
did not know what I was supposed to do, but I showed up and tried to decide
what I could do to help. We held high
council meeting once a week on Monday nights and Tuesday night was family night
in the stake. I suppose that I attended,
at the most, 10 high council meetings and then was called to be the stake
president and preside over the high council.
I chose the two counselors in the stake presidency to replace the two
high councilors that I chose to be my counselors in the stake presidency. I was instructed to release them as soon as
possible, because one was my father.
I
read and reread the handbook of general instruction. I had back copies of the priesthood bulletin
and I read all those and noted how the instructions changed from time to
time. I read the book Priesthood and
Church Government. I patterned what I
did after what I had seen done until I found instructions to the contrary or as
I was led by the spirit. I read the
scriptures at night while your mother was getting ready for bed. I felt a great need to know the gospel and to
know the doctrine and the administration of the church. I got my father’s tapes that he had made of
the regional meetings that he had attended, and I made it a point to attend
general conference and to read past conference reports. I wanted to be the most well-informed person
in the stake. I felt that there was much
to learn.
At
that period in the church there was a great deal of material, which came out
from the brethren to teach the priesthood their duty. I would go over it and share the filmstrips
and movies with my family. I would then
teach it to the high council and the bishops in hopes that they would pass it
on to the members. I found that the
biggest problem that I had as a stake president was that the information and
instruction given at the stake level never filtered down to the individual member
in the ward. Some of course did get
there but it was a minimum and the things that I considered important were
often not communicated to the people that needed to hear. I believe that this is still a prime problem
in the church today. I believe that the
high council is an indispensable part of that communication link. There were many members of the high council
who did not feel it their responsibility to facilitate the communication. I often told the council that proper
communication needed to be reinforced in at least three different modes and oft
repeated in order for the message to sink in and be understood.
As
I was new at things, I did not know anything about what was expected of the
high council and so I had to read and learn what was expected of the high
council. The stake was formed from a
mission district in 1962 and so was only 6 years old when I was called to
preside. No one knew very much, and most
had not served on a high council prior to their call to serve on that one. I felt it was my calling to teach them their
duty and I spent a lot of time doing that.
I would learn something and then I would teach that to the high
council. We had never had a disciplinary
council in the stake and so I had to learn and study about what to do. I am sure that I made some mistakes, but no
one knew any better what to do than I did.
I read the journal of discourses about church courts and proceedings and
then read what the handbook and Priesthood and Church Government had to
say. It was a learning experience for
everyone.
I
observed that as the high counselors came and went, how each one handled his assignments and
learned his duty. I was disappointed in
many brethren, because they would be given a handbook of general instructions
and various handbooks of their assigned responsibilities and they would not
read them or learn what they were expected to do. They would not polish their speaking skills
or learn to be better than they were. I
did not feel that I should hold instruction classes in how to be a high
counselor. I was learning how to be a
stake president and I was busy enough with that. I did what I could, but I could not hold people’s
hands. I made assignments and then
expected them to use their energy and ability to receive inspiration to do the
job and get results. I was not the kind
of administrator who called to check up to see if they had accomplished their
assignment. I might have been able to
get better results if I had learned to do that.
I just gave the assignment and then if it wasn’t done, I did not give it
to someone else. It just wasn’t
done. Now that I have had 30 years’
experience, I would probably do things differently. I tried to involve everyone in the discussion
and then explain why I made the decision that I did.
I
felt that discussions on a topic to bring out everyone’s point of view was
important but most of the members of the high council would sit and listen and
not participate and would not feel that they would dare to enter into the
discussion. They felt that they were
there to rubber stamp the decisions of the stake presidency and thus there was
not a true council. Many of them did not
take time to think about the issue or to put in some study to determine what principles
applied to the situation. They then were
not a part of the process and many were afraid to make their opinions
known. They were afraid, I guess, of
thinking that their opinion was of no worth.
This makes the concept of government by council a farce rather than a
reality. The strength of the stake
presidency and high council working together is that one should come to a
decision with all aspects of the problem having been critically appraised by
more than one person.
Just
as there are many different people by outward appearance, there are different
ways to lead in the church. The leaders
are diverse and not two people will do things exactly alike, but the closer
that one can come to a unity of purpose, the closer we come to what the Savior
would do. I am convinced that there is
more than one right way to do things, but not everything. The high council is a place to learn
spirituality as well as administration, but some leaders are so engrossed in
the temporal affairs, that they short the spiritual side of things. I once made a list of things that I would do
differently if I were called to leadership again.
1.
Be prepared to teach at all times and in all situations. Often when I would visit a ward priesthood meeting,
they would ask me if I had anything to say or a message and I would feel that I
would not have anything to say so I would decline to say anything. If I had it to do over again, I would never
miss an opportunity to teach by the spirit and from the scriptures. The members need the example and are hungry
for spiritual things. Since the stake
president and high councilors are called to be teachers, they cannot be weary
in the administration of their duties to teach and lead. I often felt that I was a like a watering
hole and everyone came to drink and I felt like I ran out of water and needed
replenishing of my own. I now know that
when such occurrences happen that the Lord will replenish us as we feed the
sheep.
2.
Take time to ponder and reflect more. I
had so much time taken up with family and practice that I could rarely have a
time to be alone and pray and ponder. I
would go into my room to pray and one of the children or my wife would have
something that needed to be done or attended to and I would lose that time when
I was spiritually prepared. I often
would find that time early in the morning in the shower to receive revelation
and ponder the things of the spirit, but it was not as often as I needed.
3.
I would take time to compliment more with deserved specific praise. I ran across some letters that I wrote to my
children at various stages of their lives.
I would do it more frequently and also include others who are
struggling. I often noticed people that
needed lifting with a kind word. I wish
that I had said just a kind word here and there more than I did. I don’t believe that you can ever be too
kind. I often feel that I have to say
something profound, but it is the time to notice and just say hello how are you,
I am interested in you, that the people need.
I would develop that part of my personality, for I am by nature shy and
not outgoing at all.
4. I would think more of Christ. So often we take that for granted, but we
spend so little time actually doing it.
Although the interpretation is strained the scripture “What think ye of Christ?”
comes to mind.
5.
I would be more familiar with the scriptures.
I felt that there were few in the stake who had an understanding of the
scriptures that I did, but I know that I was not and still am not as conversant
with them as I would wish to be.
6.
I would teach people to learn to be guided by the spirit. I tried to do this, but I do not feel that I
was successful. I believe that this is
one of the great needs of the church today.
We have a tendency to get caught up in doctrinal dissertations and not
to bask in the sweet influence of the spirit, which can teach us far better and
far quicker than mortal words.
7.
I would be bold without being overbearing.
The invitation to come to Christ can be issued to member and non-member
alike with sweetness that will mimic the Saviors invitation.
I
suppose that I could add to the list more, but that will suffice to work on for
the next few years. I can do all of
these things without being in a leadership position, but when one is in that position,
he is given exposure that makes it imperative that he emulate the Savior more.
I
have read the Book of Mormon many times, but about 2 years ago I came upon Alma
13 and it was as though I had never read it before. It defines the duties and office of High
Priest. It mandates the High Priest to
be a teacher of righteousness. If I were
to ever address a high council again, I would point out that we are to be
teachers constantly and that we have been called to this calling before the
foundation of this world, because of our righteousness. If we fail in this calling, we have thrown
away a great heritage. I do not ever
hope to interview any High Priest who says like one did years ago. ‘I let my wife give all the family home
evening lessons, because I am not a teacher.’
I do not think that that excuse will wash when we meet our Savior. We will then see as we are seen and know as
we are known and will then realize who we are and what God expected of us. That will be a great day of revelation for
many people.
I
think that you have the understanding to learn your duty and to act in the
office in which you are called with all diligence. I appreciate being your father and the father
of good children. I appreciate the fact
that you have been true to the present and assume that you will be true in the
future. I love to be in your presence
and for me it is a great honor to be your father. I hope that in the future we will have some
time to visit in depth, but I do not feel that it will be for some time, because
of our callings. We may have to put that
on hold until the appropriate time comes for both of us. In the meantime, we will have to communicate
by e-mail and letter and the occasional call.
I appreciate your insight into gospel matters that is communicated in
the talks that you have sent us. If it
fits into your schedule, please continue to share. We will try and keep up our spirituality on
this end so that we can all be edified.
Love,
Dad
