<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Calling Disqualifiers (And No, It’s Not Because You’re Unworthy)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.nine-moons.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=909" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 21:34:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: JES</title>
		<link>http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909&#038;cpage=1#comment-78273</link>
		<dc:creator>JES</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Mar 2009 04:18:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909#comment-78273</guid>
		<description>#20 - Just FYI, but an un-married man CAN be called to Primary, as well as a married man.  A married man doesn&#039;t have to be called to Primary with his spouse either.  Many wards do that as a convenience.  You&#039;re just not supposed to have an individual man in the classroom alone with the kids.  So, 2 men could be called to be co-teachers, regardless of their marital status.

Sorry, I realize this is way off the current topic, but I didn&#039;t want it to slide by.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#20 &#8211; Just FYI, but an un-married man CAN be called to Primary, as well as a married man.  A married man doesn&#8217;t have to be called to Primary with his spouse either.  Many wards do that as a convenience.  You&#8217;re just not supposed to have an individual man in the classroom alone with the kids.  So, 2 men could be called to be co-teachers, regardless of their marital status.</p>
<p>Sorry, I realize this is way off the current topic, but I didn&#8217;t want it to slide by.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MCQ</title>
		<link>http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909&#038;cpage=1#comment-78255</link>
		<dc:creator>MCQ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2009 20:40:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909#comment-78255</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;And the one-sidedness of the list makes it feel sexist in this context because (in Mormonism) the only people authorized to make these “bad-employee” judgments are male.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

No.  Callings may be extended by a bishop, but many calling decisions are made by women in the organizations they preside over: RS, Primary, YW.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>And the one-sidedness of the list makes it feel sexist in this context because (in Mormonism) the only people authorized to make these “bad-employee” judgments are male.</p></blockquote>
<p>No.  Callings may be extended by a bishop, but many calling decisions are made by women in the organizations they preside over: RS, Primary, YW.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C. L. Hanson</title>
		<link>http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909&#038;cpage=1#comment-78252</link>
		<dc:creator>C. L. Hanson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2009 19:30:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909#comment-78252</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;So, based on the post, church callings are a lot like secular jobs.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

That is exactly what I was thinking when I first read this post.  This is a good list, but I would say that it&#039;s hardly Mormon-specific -- all of these can be phrased to relate to an ordinary workplace.

The one downside of the list is the one-sidedness.  Yes, there are a lot of dysfunctional employee-types, but there are also a lot of dysfunctional boss-types.  And the one-sidedness of the list makes it feel sexist in this context because (in Mormonism) the only people authorized to make these &quot;bad-employee&quot; judgments are male.

Ultimately, in a secular job, if you have an irreconcilable problem with your boss, at least you can quit!!  In a Mormon ward, well, I guess you just have to suck it up...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>So, based on the post, church callings are a lot like secular jobs.</p></blockquote>
<p>That is exactly what I was thinking when I first read this post.  This is a good list, but I would say that it&#8217;s hardly Mormon-specific &#8212; all of these can be phrased to relate to an ordinary workplace.</p>
<p>The one downside of the list is the one-sidedness.  Yes, there are a lot of dysfunctional employee-types, but there are also a lot of dysfunctional boss-types.  And the one-sidedness of the list makes it feel sexist in this context because (in Mormonism) the only people authorized to make these &#8220;bad-employee&#8221; judgments are male.</p>
<p>Ultimately, in a secular job, if you have an irreconcilable problem with your boss, at least you can quit!!  In a Mormon ward, well, I guess you just have to suck it up&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MCQ</title>
		<link>http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909&#038;cpage=1#comment-78216</link>
		<dc:creator>MCQ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:49:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909#comment-78216</guid>
		<description>The only really good reason not to accept a calling is if you think you just can&#039;t physically do it.  Better to say no than to do a poor job because you just can&#039;t be there when you need to be.

I&#039;ve never said no to a calling but there are probably a couple I should have.  Looking back, I wasn&#039;t able to do a very good job and if I had been honest with eveyone, maybe someone else would have been called that would have been better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The only really good reason not to accept a calling is if you think you just can&#8217;t physically do it.  Better to say no than to do a poor job because you just can&#8217;t be there when you need to be.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve never said no to a calling but there are probably a couple I should have.  Looking back, I wasn&#8217;t able to do a very good job and if I had been honest with eveyone, maybe someone else would have been called that would have been better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cheryl</title>
		<link>http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909&#038;cpage=1#comment-78210</link>
		<dc:creator>cheryl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:35:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909#comment-78210</guid>
		<description>MCQ and Rusty --
Good points. I think I forgot there for a moment that I had to make those very decisions --on what was best for the Primary kids. Flip side PoV! Extending versus accepting. 

&lt;em&gt;Isn’t it “right” simply by virtue of the fact that you have been called to serve others?&lt;/em&gt;

Yes! And that&#039;s why I can&#039;t seem to wrap my head around discussions (like you mentioned that seem to be found everywhere) where people are constantly refusing to accept callings. I think it combines what I said about blessing our own lives, and with what you said, about blessing those we will serve. It&#039;s a combo and --to me --a perfect package (and another reason a lay clergy totally rocks).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MCQ and Rusty &#8211;<br />
Good points. I think I forgot there for a moment that I had to make those very decisions &#8211;on what was best for the Primary kids. Flip side PoV! Extending versus accepting. </p>
<p><em>Isn’t it “right” simply by virtue of the fact that you have been called to serve others?</em></p>
<p>Yes! And that&#8217;s why I can&#8217;t seem to wrap my head around discussions (like you mentioned that seem to be found everywhere) where people are constantly refusing to accept callings. I think it combines what I said about blessing our own lives, and with what you said, about blessing those we will serve. It&#8217;s a combo and &#8211;to me &#8211;a perfect package (and another reason a lay clergy totally rocks).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rusty</title>
		<link>http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909&#038;cpage=1#comment-78209</link>
		<dc:creator>Rusty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:30:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909#comment-78209</guid>
		<description>MCQ,
Exactly. Thank you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MCQ,<br />
Exactly. Thank you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rusty</title>
		<link>http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909&#038;cpage=1#comment-78208</link>
		<dc:creator>Rusty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:29:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909#comment-78208</guid>
		<description>I have no argument that service is good for the individual. Totally agree. But why do we always insist on framing the discussion (of callings) in terms of how it affects &lt;i&gt;us&lt;/i&gt; rather than the people we are called to serve? I think the result of that inward focus is all of these discussions (plenty in the bloggernacle, but also between members/friends/spouses/etc.) about whether or not a calling is &quot;right&quot; for them. Isn&#039;t it &quot;right&quot; simply by virtue of the fact that you have been called to serve others?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have no argument that service is good for the individual. Totally agree. But why do we always insist on framing the discussion (of callings) in terms of how it affects <i>us</i> rather than the people we are called to serve? I think the result of that inward focus is all of these discussions (plenty in the bloggernacle, but also between members/friends/spouses/etc.) about whether or not a calling is &#8220;right&#8221; for them. Isn&#8217;t it &#8220;right&#8221; simply by virtue of the fact that you have been called to serve others?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MCQ</title>
		<link>http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909&#038;cpage=1#comment-78206</link>
		<dc:creator>MCQ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:19:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909#comment-78206</guid>
		<description>Cheryl,I agree with that 100% but I think Rusty is talking about the things that are discussed by those who are trying to decide on who gets what calling.  In that situation, I think Rusty is saying (and I agree) that it rarely is an issue whether the person who is called will benefit from the calling.  We all hope and assume that will happen, but we call people mostly because we hope and believe that they have the skills and spirit that will actually benefit the people they will be serving.  

It&#039;s easy to lose sight of that when we second guess callings.  We forget that, first and foremost, stuff just needs to get done.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cheryl,I agree with that 100% but I think Rusty is talking about the things that are discussed by those who are trying to decide on who gets what calling.  In that situation, I think Rusty is saying (and I agree) that it rarely is an issue whether the person who is called will benefit from the calling.  We all hope and assume that will happen, but we call people mostly because we hope and believe that they have the skills and spirit that will actually benefit the people they will be serving.  </p>
<p>It&#8217;s easy to lose sight of that when we second guess callings.  We forget that, first and foremost, stuff just needs to get done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cheryl</title>
		<link>http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909&#038;cpage=1#comment-78205</link>
		<dc:creator>cheryl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:37:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909#comment-78205</guid>
		<description>Yes, but Rusty, serving others IS good for the individual. Always. And when I&#039;ve been pushed into an arena I where I have no experience and am terrified (like having never held any kind of Primary calling and then being called to be the Primary President), I end up learning the most. I would never dream of accepting a calling for self-gratification, but I have never NOT benefited and grown from a calling. For sure we should be focused on the service invovled, but honestly? It&#039;s usually the individual with the calling who grows and learns the most --which I think is part of the point. If we don&#039;t learn and grow in our experiences and are given opportunities to do so, then where does that leave us? Service in the church teaches us how to love each other and serve --but we can&#039;t help but be blessed in return. 

I&#039;ve had several leaders and teachers that have helped me and inspired my life --but I&#039;m betting they learned and grew from that experience 10 times more than I did.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, but Rusty, serving others IS good for the individual. Always. And when I&#8217;ve been pushed into an arena I where I have no experience and am terrified (like having never held any kind of Primary calling and then being called to be the Primary President), I end up learning the most. I would never dream of accepting a calling for self-gratification, but I have never NOT benefited and grown from a calling. For sure we should be focused on the service invovled, but honestly? It&#8217;s usually the individual with the calling who grows and learns the most &#8211;which I think is part of the point. If we don&#8217;t learn and grow in our experiences and are given opportunities to do so, then where does that leave us? Service in the church teaches us how to love each other and serve &#8211;but we can&#8217;t help but be blessed in return. </p>
<p>I&#8217;ve had several leaders and teachers that have helped me and inspired my life &#8211;but I&#8217;m betting they learned and grew from that experience 10 times more than I did.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rusty</title>
		<link>http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909&#038;cpage=1#comment-78204</link>
		<dc:creator>Rusty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:14:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=909#comment-78204</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;”most callings happen because of what it can do for the individual. “&lt;/i&gt;

Cheryl,
I disagree. I think that’s an added benefit, but not the important part. It makes me uncomfortable to think that my service is about me. In fact, that’s what makes me so uncomfortable in these discussions about callings is that everyone talks so much about how callings are good for them or not right for them or whatever and rarely does anyone mention those who are being served. I don’t serve so that I can benefit, I serve so that whomever I serve can benefit. Wouldn’t it be awesome if everyone spoke of their calling in terms of the recipient of the service rather than its effect on their own lives?

&lt;i&gt;”callings are based on more practical issues and not necessarily a reflection of our standing in the eternities. “&lt;/i&gt;

CJ,
I completely agree with you if by “practical” you mean “the best way by which people can be served.” My feeling is that our eternal standing is a reflection of the kind of person we have become, not whether we’ve figured out how to manage the home teaching numbers effectively.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>”most callings happen because of what it can do for the individual. “</i></p>
<p>Cheryl,<br />
I disagree. I think that’s an added benefit, but not the important part. It makes me uncomfortable to think that my service is about me. In fact, that’s what makes me so uncomfortable in these discussions about callings is that everyone talks so much about how callings are good for them or not right for them or whatever and rarely does anyone mention those who are being served. I don’t serve so that I can benefit, I serve so that whomever I serve can benefit. Wouldn’t it be awesome if everyone spoke of their calling in terms of the recipient of the service rather than its effect on their own lives?</p>
<p><i>”callings are based on more practical issues and not necessarily a reflection of our standing in the eternities. “</i></p>
<p>CJ,<br />
I completely agree with you if by “practical” you mean “the best way by which people can be served.” My feeling is that our eternal standing is a reflection of the kind of person we have become, not whether we’ve figured out how to manage the home teaching numbers effectively.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
