Drifting wrote:If one were being strict to the adherence of the Word of Wisdom, temple reccommend interviews would include a 'weigh in' for the member.
sock puppet wrote:If a bishop did that, as a thinking, rational adult viewing D&C section 76, what do you think the SP or up line authority at the COB would do? Do you think it would be a reprimand from the upline for having been a thinking, rational adult rather than a local automaton implementing the COB's edicts, such as not suffering critical analysis being openly aired in local church meetings?
Drifting wrote:Definitely a reprimand, unless the Bishop invoked the fact that he had prayed about his decision and been given a witness by the Holy Spirit that what he was doing was right. If he claimed that they'd sack him...errmm....release him...despite that being the officially authorised method for knowing what is correct.
Drifting, you do know that there are religions that lace together rather loosely local congregations and their respective leaders, but that the local leader is the spiritual guide for the local congregation? You might want to check them out. In those instances, I would wholeheartedly agree that the buck of responsibility stops with the local leader. If he or she is not making responsible decisions and creating a culture of inclusivity and tolerance, including tolerance of critical thinking on religious topics, he or she is clearly culpable. Such a church might be just the ticket for you. You could have engaging religious discussions where critical analysis and new thoughts are welcomed and challenged--but in an intellectually challenging way, not a stifling way--all within the societal comfort of a 'brotherhood'.
Mormonism is a highly structured, top-down hierarchy. The Brethren/COB do not want the possibility of deviation by its members or local leaders. They want implementation of the COB edicts by the local leaders, and compliance and obedience by the local leaders and members. Mormonism is a great place for those that are adept corporate animals, taking and implementing directives from one's upline in how he or she shepherds those under his or her charge.
However, just as in the military, a junior officer is supposed to use his brain and common sense to some degree when receiving an order from a senior officer, and may face responsibility particularly if it is carried out in violation of general standing rules--such as the criminality of Lt. Walmart. Calley in the My Lai Massacre situation in Vietnam in March 1968--Mormon bishops could find themselves hung up for the way that they implement edicts from the Brethren/COB. However, unlike the military code that made killing non-enemy combatants, like the villagers of My Lai, a crime, the Brethren/COB has issued no general edict that members should be encouraged or even allowed to express their critical thoughts if they are incongruous with the Brethren/COB's edicts. In short, it sounds as if the local leaders you had in mind were just 'following orders'.
