In response to my counselors about recommendations of HC assignments and other leadership changes

10 October 2019

Paul and Steven,

I appreciate your feedback to my recommendations and additional counsel. You both have strong opinions and share them candidly, which is great. 

I’m sorry that we have not been able to find time to visit in person. I appreciate your willingness to continue the discussion via email, even though that’s not the ideal form of communication, as we’ve all expressed multiple times in our visits.

Let me respond to two concerns shared and then ask some questions.

RECOMMENDING COUNSELORS

I appreciate your strong feelings to leave inspiration to the bishop for recommending his counselor. Having met personally many times with Bishop Miller for 4+ years I feel I know him quite well. I can give you multiple reasons I believe he would jump at the chance to have Brock Miller as his counselor, if Brock were made available. I’m OK if the bishop chooses not to recommend Brock, but decides to use  him instead elsewhere in his AP program or even in another capacity. But I expect fully Bishop Miller will recommend Brock, as long as we don’t have misgivings. 

Steven, you mentioned that you both do not recommend Brock to serve as a counselor in the Damascus bishopric. Is there a reason you do not recommend him to serve there, or is it just you don’t want him to be released as Stake YM president?

Speaking of recommending counselors, Paul, I appreciate so much you creating the list of potential counselor candidates for Bro Lindhorst. I believe he will welcome the list gratefully and with open arms.

One more thing…

Of course there’s a chance Bro Lindhorst will request a HC to serve in the YSA branch presidency creating an opening for Brock to be called to the HC, but it’s not likely (only 4 HC are empty nesters). I’m reluctant to “push” out any of the current HC to make room for Brock. Craig Dobson is the only HC who has served for more than 2 years and he just barely completed 2 years in September. That’s one reason I don’t think it’s prudent that we wait even until December to make these changes.

Speaking of timing…

TIMING

Steven raised the concern about acting so quickly; that we take our time on these changes. That’s never bad advice. 

I’ve found very interesting how quickly the Brethren are making changes. Is this a case of the Lord suddenly opening the windows of heaven and directing all of these changes? That may be some of it, but I also believe it’s because we have a Prophet who is so decisive. Both of his counselors have mentioned openly how they’re almost taken aback by how decisive President Nelson is—something they attribute to his years as a surgeon and having to make quick, major (life and death) decisions.

Because the Brethren are giving very specific instructions quickly and often, I find myself wanting to be “quick to obey.”

OUR DISCUSSION

Because I have us on a “fast track” we don’t have a lot of time to discuss things in person. I welcome us getting together some time next week, after Paul has returned. I’m available next Thursday evening, Oct 17, at 7:00 pm if both of you are available. I could do a conference call on Wednesday, Oct. 16. Of course, I’m usually available for a late afternoon conference call most any late afternoon or evening, including a conference call on Monday, Oct 13, at 9:00 pm..

If you feel strongly you still want to discuss the recommendations I made, let’s find some time next week. I would appreciate us not including this topic in our discussion at our “Presidency Retreat” at 7:00 am on Saturday, Oct. 19 (at my home) as we need time to discuss plans for 2020. Besides, if we’re going to call two current HC as stake YM and stake SS presidents, we need time to visit with them before we sustain them in HC meeting on Sunday, Oct 20.

In the meantime, I have some more questions that I need your counsel on. I will send them separately so you can address them separately. If you prefer not to respond to them via email, that’s fine. Steven, we can discuss them in presidency meeting on Sunday. And Paul you can give me a call at your convenience and share with me your feelings.

Thank you so much, both of you, for being mighty counselors.

Crismon

Question #1

What do you see as the role of the Stake Young Men presidency? Where they no longer have ward counterparts, what do we expect of them besides planning and organizing stake AP events (with the stake APYW and youth committees)?

Do we expect them to visit the AP quorums and activities in all the wards?

Do we expect them to train the ward AP advisers and specialists…or is that the bishopric’s responsibility?

Do we expect them to interface with or even train the bishoprics? If so, how, when and where?

Question #2

Where the bishoprics now take an increased ownership of the Aaronic Priesthood program in the ward and where the bishop only has a regular accountability interview with the stake president…whether intentional or not by the Brethren…that means the stake president, to some degree, assumes an increased ownership of the Aaronic Priesthood program. At least that’s how I see it.

How can the stake president’s counselor and the Stake YM presidency more effectively assist the stake president to work with each bishop in moving forward the work of the AP in each ward?



Question #3

What concerns, if any, do you have with Matt Newell serving as the Stake Young Men’s president?

While we will not dictate to him his counselors, we have an opportunity to identify and encourage consideration of strong counselors (such as members of ward YM presidencies who are about to be released). I do not feel we have the strongest candidates in Pat Carsner and Brock Johnson. Now is the time to make the change. Hopefully we can do so without hurting feelings. 

Who are others among the members in our stake who would complement and help Matt rise to the occasion?

Question #4

This one needs to be answered right away…

I know you both feel strongly about retaining Brock Miller as Stake YM president. Brethren, it’s not going to happen for several reasons: (1) I don’t want to push someone out of the HC prematurely just to make room for Brock (this is not secondary to me); (2) eliminating the ward YM presidencies, in my opinion, minimizes significantly the influence and impact of a Stake YM presidency; and (3) Brock has always been one of three top candidates to replace Bishop Miller in June; in my opinion, if the Lord has chosen Brock then allowing him to serve in the ward for the next 8 months will be wonderful preparation.

I know this is disappointing to you both. I’m so very sorry. But I, too, have strong feelings in the matter.

So recognizing that there will be a new Stake YM president in the coming weeks, my question is: Do we still want to sustain Pat Carsner this Sunday knowing he may not be retained by the new stake YM president or do we explain to Pat the dilemma we face (because of the General Conference announcement) and that the sustaining is now on hold until the Stake YM presidency is reorganized?