We sustained a new bishop in
our ward today. Bishop Allen and his
family are moving (actually have moved for the most part), so he was released
today and Bishop Galindo was sustained.
There was an audible gasp from some in the chapel when Brother Galindo’s
name was called by President Skinner, but I will admit to being 98% certain
that his name would be the one called.
When Bishop Allen pulled him out of Gospel Principles class last week
(he attends—well, has been attending—quite often to support us and to be there
for the new converts and investigators) and we didn’t see him for the rest of
the block, I had an inkling. My
suspicion became stronger when I learned later that day that 1) Sister Galindo
was pulled from primary and also didn’t return, and 2) President Skinner was
seen in the building. J
It’s always interesting when a
new bishop is called. This is the third
change we’ve seen in our ward since moving into this area. Each time I’ve watched these good brethren
grow into their calling and become living examples of this quotation from
President Thomas S. Monson: “President Harold B. Lee was talking to me one day
concerning those who feel inadequate and are worried when they receive an
assignment in the Church. He counseled, ‘Remember, whom the Lord calls, the
Lord qualifies’” (Ensign, Nov. 1995, 50). Bishop Galindo said he received
this same thought while in the temple earlier this week contemplating the call
that had been extended to him. I am
certain that as he puts forth his best effort, the Lord will magnify those
efforts in ways he could scarcely have expected. I’ve seen that happen with the previous
bishops; I have seen that with my own callings.
Bishop Galindo is a convert of
five years—it took him 10 years and multiple sets of missionaries before he was
ready to commit to becoming a member to the Church. As was expressed today (I had heard the story
before, but it was nice to be reminded), what finally clicked was when an Elder
told him that he could be sealed to his wife in the temple for eternity. I’m not sure if none of the previous Elders
had ever mentioned this before, but this was the first missionary to say it in
a way that sunk deep. Not long
afterward, Brother Galindo wanted to know what he needed to do to be baptized. Jennifer and I hosted him and his wife, with
several others, when it was time for them to receive the Temple Preparation
lessons. We were asked by them to be
their escorts when they attended their initial endowment session and were
present for their sealing. In fact, I
was just in my bedroom and saw a picture of Jennifer and me on our dresser and
realized that it was taken after he and Sister Galindo were sealed in the
Redlands Temple. J Honestly, when his name was formally
announced and I (along with the rest of the congregation), was asked to sustain
him in this calling, I gladly raised my arm to the square because I was blessed
at that moment to know that his call
came from God. At that moment I also
knew I was willing to do whatever I could to help him fulfill his new assignment.
That’s the thing about
sustaining. It is a unique aspect of the
Latter-day Saints. We have an
opportunity each time a formal calling is issued in the ward, stake or general
offices of the Church to raise our arm to the square and sustain the actions
being taken. After we are asked “all in
favor,” the question is then submitted, “Those opposed, if any, may manifest it.” During the recent general conference, for the
first time in over 30 years, a small group of vocal people expressed opposition
during the sustaining of the general authorities. Based on the fact that the question is asked,
the possibility of someone expressing opposition is present. However, I
wonder if an understanding of the opposition “vote” is truly had among us.
The Church handbook of
instructions is very clear on the matter of a dissenting vote during the
sustaining process. It states: “If a
member in good standing gives a
dissenting vote when someone is presented to be sustained, the presiding
officer or another assigned priesthood officer confers with the dissenting
member in private after the meeting. The officer determines whether the
dissenting vote was based on knowledge that the person who was presented is guilty of conduct that should disqualify
him or her from serving in the position” (Handbook 2: Administering the Church [2010], 19.3, emphasis added).
I highlighted the two important points in that instruction. First, the dissenting member needs to be “in
good standing,” and second, the dissenting vote should be based on knowledge by
the dissenter that the called man or woman “is guilty of conduct that should
disqualify him or her from serving in the position.”
When members of The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints vote to sustain a calling, we are not casting
a ballot as though our vote is part of the person’s election to that
calling. Instead, we are agreeing with
the action being taken and “voting” to support, uplift and sustain the person
who has already been called “by prophesy” (Articles of Faith 1:5) and has
accepted the offered assignment. In the
case of Bishop Galindo, President Skinner did not stand before our ward
congregation and say, “Your ward needs a new bishop and we have identified the
following three brethren: Brother Doe, Brother Roe and Brother Galindo. I will now conduct the voting on which one of
these brethren you feel would be qualified to lead the ward.” Instead he said something like this: “We have
submitted a name to the First Presidency and have been authorized to call Brother
Galindo as the new bishop of the ward. All in favor of this action; are there
any opposed.”
If we truly consider the
process, President Skinner and his counsellors had already prayed and received
an answer from the Lord regarding who should now lead our ward. They submitted their recommendation to the
First Presidency and received an endorsement of the Lord’s choice. The call had been extended to and accepted by
Brother Galindo. Today, we were asked to
offer our own endorsement of this action.
In essence, we were asked to exercise our moral agency in an acceptance
of the Lord’s choice of bishop. Our vote
didn’t count for anything but our humble acceptance of the Lord’s revelation to
His local servants and our pledge to uphold and support this good brother as he
shoulders this particular mantel.
From what I understand of those
people who announced their dissension during conference, their basic opposition
appears to arise from some dissatisfaction with something the Church is doing
or not doing and they are “voting” in opposition because of it. If this is the case, then what they are
failing to understand is that the Church isn’t a democracy. Just because some teaching or position or
doctrine isn’t liked, we don’t yell “opposed” during the sustaining process and
then act as though our dissenting vote is a ballot cast in opposition to Church
leadership. If we have knowledge about
some act that would disqualify a person from service, then
we should raise our arm in dissent. Honestly,
if we have knowledge of something of this magnitude, we should have gone to the
person first and then to the leadership if the person refuses to properly
handle the situation. Somehow, I have
great difficulty believing this was the case in the dissension of those who
voted in opposition during conference.
Unfortunately, I have a nagging feeling that what happened a few weeks ago
won’t be a one-time event. Now that it’s
been done, I suspect it might be tried again.
Regardless, it is up to all of
us as members to constantly keep close watch over our testimonies of those
called to leadership positions. As I
indicated earlier, intellectually I had settled in my mind the likelihood of Bishop
Galindo’s call, but when his name was formally announced I felt a spiritual
confirmation to accompany the intellectual one.
That is my testimony of his call.
None of the brothers and sisters in the general quorums and auxiliaries
campaigned for the offices they hold.
Instead, when the Lord called, they, like Samuel of old, replied, “Speak;
for thy servant heareth” (1 Samuel 3:10).
Neither did Bishop Galindo campaign for the calling that is now
his. In the days before the call came,
he was curiously wondering like all the rest of us who would be called to the
position. I doubt he considered himself
at all. Now that he has been called and
I have sustained him, it is up to me to be true to my “vote” and do all that I
can, like Aaron and Hur with Moses, to “[stay] up his hands” and keep them “steady
until the going down of the sun” (Exodus 17:12).