Listen to the still small voice! Listen. Listen.

In 12-step programs there are often promises associated with working the steps.  Families Anonymous is a group that helps those who have addicted loved ones. While the better-known Al-Anon is for those whose loved ones are alcoholics, Families Anonymous is for anyone who has a loved one with any chemical addiction.


And true to the tradition, there are promises in Families Anonymous. The promises are the result in the lives of many people who work the steps. One of them is this:

We will intuitively know how to handle situations which used to baffle us.

I was thinking about this promise recently. In a lesson someone mentioned this verse from the Doctrine & Covenants:

For it shall be given you in the very hour, yea, in the very moment, what ye shall say.

The revelation to Joseph is an echo of this counsel from the Lord to the ancient apostles: 

But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.

None of these admonitions is a suggestion that we should not prepare for difficult circumstances. They are, instead, admonitions that if we prepare, the Lord will provide us with what we need when we need it.

The scriptural references are for those called to do difficult things: to preach the gospel, sometimes in adverse circumstances. And the Lord promises that when His servants are on His errand, He will bless them with the right words to say.

Perhaps you’ve seen that in action: a sacrament meeting speaker who delivers a talk that seems out of his or her natural ability, a missionary who teaches with a particular strength of testimony beyond his years, a Relief Society president who knows what comfort to offer a young sister when she needs it the most.

The Families Anonymous promise, though not scriptural, suggests the same blessing is available in our personal lives. As we work the 12 steps (which are really a path to applying the atonement in our lives), we become more in tune with spiritual things. (Most workers of 12-step programs will refer to them as spiritual journeys.) And it makes sense as we open our hearts to the spirit, we will be more receptive. And the spirit will help us to know instinctively how to do things we could not do before.

As a parent, I relish inviting the spirit to help me learn how to be better. The work I have as parent – to teach the gospel to the most important audience I will ever face – is daunting to me, and I have regularly felt myself unequal to the task. But I am buoyed by the Lord’s promise to help me. And I have seen that help at work in my own home. I have had flashes of inspiration, of instinctively knowing what to say (or how to say it), of having words given to me in the very moment that I need them.

Not that I always listen. But I’m getting better at that. I’m open to the possibility that I don’t have all the answers (that lesson took surprisingly long on my parenting journey). And I recognize that I need to be quiet enough to hear the still small voice. When I can stop and ask, “What wouldst Thou have me do?” I can feel the promptings that will help me.

It’s good to know I’m not alone as a parent. Good for me, and good for my kids.

Conference questions and answers

I came to conference with questions this time around. There were three specific ones that I had in my head and in my heart. I had not written them down, but I knew what they were.

Similar answers came to each question, but not in the same talks.

It has caused me to reflect on how my process of receiving answers to prayers works. Doctrine & Covenants gives us some clues to general processes in the Lord’s instructions to Oliver Cowdrey in sections 6, 8 and 9. You know them: ponder, pray, think about your own solutions and your own process, feel peace in heart and mind, feel a burning in the bosom, and remember what you’ve learned.

Joseph Smith taught this about divine instruction:

When you feel pure intelligence flowing into you, it may give you sudden strokes of ideas, so that by noticing it, you may find it fulfilled the same day or soon; (i.e.) those things that were presented unto your minds by the Spirit of God, will come to pass; and thus by learning the Spirit of God and understanding it, you may grow into the principle of revelation, until you become perfect in Christ Jesus.”
(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith [1976], 151.)

I’ve written before that my answers to prayer rarely come during the prayer, almost never during the first prayer.

As I prepared for this particular conference, I had three broad questions in my mind. One concerned one of my children, one concerned my job, and one concerned a health concern of mine. These are not questions specific to conference, since these three items have been occupying my prayers off and on for months. But I looked at conference as one opportunity among many to receive guidance.

What I found is that guidance came. Some of it came in overarching themes, and some in specific quotations. A particular sentence in a particular talk struck me in a particular way. A story related by a speaker related to one of my issues. Recurring and connecting themes from several talks united to offer instruction and comfort.

In the end, most of my answers were comforting answers rather than go-and-do answers this time. That’s not always so. But this time I was counseled to be patient and to trust that the Lord can do His work. He has a way to accomplish what He needs to accomplish. That message is reassuring to me.

As I reflected on the Lord’s instructions through the prophet Joseph, it occurred to me that the Lord did whisper peace to my heart and mind. The Lord did cause my bosom to burn as I pondered ideas I had about my questions. And I felt what I assume is the pure intelligence, the sudden strokes of ideas that Joseph described. Not everything happened at once. And I am not sure I recognized each of those events as they happened, some only were clearer after the fact. But I do know that answers came.

These particular questions are still too tender for me to discuss in great detail, which makes this essay less readable; for that I’m sorry. But hopefully my writing will encourage you to think about how conference spoke to you – or that is, how the Lord spoke to you through conference.

My good bishop

When I pray in a meeting in our ward, I typically include the sentence, “And please bless our good bishop and those who serve with him.” And in our family prayers I often include the sentence, “And please bless our good bishop and his family.”

Although I use those words often, they are not a vain repetition. I have come to learn through my own experience that the men who serve as bishops are good men who desire to do good things. They are the product of their own experience, to be sure, and each brings his own personality and even biases to the calling. But I have also observed that each bishop I have known personally carries a specific mantle associated with his calling – one that comes when he is called and leaves when he is released.

Some of my bishops have been good friends of mine before their calling. It would have been easy for me to assume that my friend was the bishop and therefore I knew him. In one case, my bishop and I had served together in the church for years in a variety of capacities before his call as bishop. His son and mine had been good friends for nearly their whole lives. His wife and mine were also close friends.

And yet, when he was called and serving as my bishop, there was something about him that was distinct and precious. Because he was my good bishop.

My lovely wife and I had the chance to meet with our new bishop yesterday. We visited with him about some challenges that we are facing in our family. We wanted him to be aware and to seek any counsel he might have to offer. We have, from time to time, met with other bishops on family matters, not because of their professional training or their personal charisma, but because we honor and respect them as those called by the Lord to be our good bishop.

There was no earth-shaking revelation that came out of yesterday’s meeting. But there was this (and though it does not surprise me, it does amaze me): Our good bishop listened to us for quite some time. He allowed us to do about 80% of the talking in our interview. He asked a few clarifying questions, and shared an observation or two along the way. After we had said nearly everything we had come to say, he reached for his scriptures, turned to a particular verse and said, “I was reading this chapter the other day and came across this verse. I’m sure you’ve read it, but perhaps it will mean something to you today. It struck me so much that I underlined it.” And then he read a verse which offered such comfort and peace; it reinforced other counsel we had heard previously, and it reaffirmed truth taught by the modern prophets.

Looking back there are several amazing things to me:

1. Our good bishop listened so well. He let us share what we’d come to tell him.

2. Our good bishop did not try to solve our problem. My lovely wife told him in the course of her sharing that she knew he could not resolve the issue we brought to him, but that we hoped that by sharing it, there would be help for all involved.

3. Our good bishop listened for inspiration. I had a stake president counsel me once that when I was bishop, I should listen 75% of the time in an interview, and during that listening time, I should be praying for inspiration so that when I spoke, I would say what the Lord gave me to say.

4. Our bishop taught us from the scriptures – scriptures he knew and studied; indeed he shared a verse that he had just read himself in his personal study. I count it as a tender mercy that he had read and retained what would comfort us.

5. The spirit confirmed the counsel we received. As the bishop shared the verse he did from the Book of Mormon, and as he concluded our meeting with prayer, the spirit’s influence was palpable. The Lord’s love for us and for our family, as manifest by our good bishop and by the spirit, was obvious to us.

I read comments from time to time about struggles members have with their local leaders, and it saddens me. I remember a relationship with a bishop I had years ago that was not very positive; we served together on the ward council and did not see eye to eye, and it was a difficult period for me. I am grateful that since that time, however, I’ve been fortunate to have positive relationships with my good bishops. (I think that I’ve grown up a bit since that earlier experience, and I freely admit that at least a large portion of the issues I had with that bishop years ago were mine, not his.)

I am certainly grateful for the good bishop I have today and for his dedicated service, and for his wife and children who support him.

An Awesome Elders Quorum President

I have long held that a great elders quorum president is an unsung hero in the church.

The bishop gets lots of praise and thanks, and he deserves it, too. The Relief Society president should be recognized as one of the bishop’s greatest co-workers in his ministry, particularly to the poor, and a wise bishop takes great advantage of that resource.

A good elders quorum president may well have (if he's doing everything he should) a church workload quite similar to the bishop’s, but he gets little recognition for what he does. The elders quorum president – the only other Melchizedek Priesthood holder in the ward with keys – does all his work at the retail level. And yet, he's often seen as "one of the guys" among his own quorum and among others in the ward.

I thought about all of this yesterday as I attended my nephew’s ward for his mission farewell talk. (He was also awesome, by the way – really awesome!) In the third hour, the bishop led the combined elders quorum and high priest group in a discussion of a couple of topics of importance to him, including home teaching. Toward the end of the bishop's comments on home teaching, the elders quorum president stood briefly to remind his quorum he had just redone the home teaching assignments (he’d made the same announcement in opening exercises), and then he did the awesome thing: he bore his testimony of the inspiriation he had received in making these assignments.

It was the bearing of that testimony that was moving to me, and I’m not even in his ward. And yet, I could feel that here was a quorum president who had counseled with the Lord and sought His guidance in making the assignments he had. He may well have counseled with others (and would have been wise to do so), but he made it clear that these were not just assignments based on geography or demographics, but on spiritual confirmation.

I believe (and hope) this happens in the church more often than we realize, that local leaders who are doing their best to honor their covenants and magnify their callings go to the Lord for His help and guidance in the work He’s called them to do. I know I did when I was an elders quorum president and a bishop. And I watch my lovely wife do the same in her present calling in the stake Relief Society presidency. I know that many Primary teachers pray about how to reach one or another of the kids in their classes. I know that youth leaders pray to understand how to approach a particularly surly youth to help soften his heart to the possibility of spiritual influence.

We’ve all heard the occasional story of a calling made out of desperation rather than inspiration. But I believe and hope those are the exceptions. I’ve sat in plenty of corporate personnel meetings in which we’ve tried to decide who should do what job. I’m happy to say my experience in the church is very different as we prayerfully considered who to recommend or who to call.

So, kudos to that elders quorum president, and to all those local leaders who seek to magnify their callings by seeking to know God’s will for them in their service.

Listening to a prophet today

A comment at another blog a week or so ago got me to thinking. The discussion was about modern interpretation of the Word of Wisdom and the present (lack of) focus on the counsel to eat meat sparingly. The commenter observed that the general authorities today don’t seem to be too worried about that particular item (based on her observation of their behavior). She said, “If they start emphasizing it, I’ll worry about it. Until then, I’ve got plenty to worry about.”

That’s a practical approach for many things. It does not say (in the specific example) that the meat issue is not important, but it doesn’t seem top-of-mind for the brethren today. It suggests instead that there are other matters that seem more urgent. I hear a speaker recently talk about going through the general conference talks and finding direct counsel he felt he should consider. He said as he read with that thought in mind, he quickly developed a list of things that were important for him to focus on (including his own personal scripture study, his own contributions to the general missionary fund, and others), based on what was taught in general conference.

It occurs to me that the leaders of the church will emphasize particular doctrines or teachings or practices at one time that may not be emphasized at another time. For instance:

In the early- and mid-20th century, there was plenty of discussion about which hand to use in taking the sacrament. Today’s handbooks and recent general conference talks are silent on the matter. Either everyone should remember the teachings from nearly 100 years ago (an interesting requirement for a church that has such growth from converts around the world), or it’s not top of mind for the folks who worry about what things we ought to worry about. I don’t suggest that it was wrong to focus on this matter years ago. But there simply isn’t the same focus on it today.

These days there is plenty of talk about tattoos and the number of earrings our youth should wear. President Hinckley felt strongly enough to address those matters in a General YW meeting and in subsequent general conference addresses and the standard has been reinforced in For The Strength Of Youth, so for now that’s important. But in fifty years will it be? Maybe. Maybe not.

Since I sustain the members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve as prophets, seers and revelators, I feel safe in looking to them for guidance on issues of my day.

This position doesn’t absolve me of my responsibility to study my scriptures, study church history and to align my behavior with the Lord’s expectations. Of course I need to honor my covenants, keep the commandments, and listen for personal promptings along the way. Looking to church leadership for guidance seems prudent to me because I sustain the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve as prophets, seers and revelators.

But what I don’t need to do is look for areas where I believe my neighbors or my local ward council members or even the general leadership of the church are deficient (or divergent from the path I think is right).

Inspiration or Revelation? Yes.

We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal, and we believe that he will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the kingdom of God. (Articles of Faith 1:9)

One of the hallmarks of the restoration of the gospel is that the heavens are still open, that God today operates by Amos’ Old Testament teaching, “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets” (Amos 3:7).

We also know, thanks to Joseph Smith’s experience, that God also reveals himself to individuals to answer prayers. Joseph followed the New Testament admonition of James to seek wisdom where he lacked it (see James 1:5), and received an answer he did not expect.

In today’s church, apostles and others speak of revelation and inspiration interchangeably. One may receive personal revelation or inspiration for one’s sphere of responsibility – for personal use, for one’s family as a parent, for one’s organization as an auxiliary leader or one’s quorum for a priesthood leader. This revelation may extend to callings to be issued, lessons to be taught, counsel to be given, service to be rendered. One should not expect to receive revelation beyond one’s scope of responsibility, however. I should not presume to receive inspiration for my bishop or for the church in general.

Some seek to distinguish between inspiration and revelation. Orson Scott Card in a recent article in Mormon Times, for instance, suggests revelation is more rare than inspiration (and more meaningful). A recent commenter on another blog suggested specific limitations for revelation, including that it must be written down and is given in the first person as if the Lord were speaking. This comment draws on a rather long article at Zomarah, and both suggest that because revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants are written down and published, all revelations must be.

I can’t support either Card’s or Zomarah’s point of view.

My dictionary defines inspiration: “to communicate ideas, etc., by a divine agency.” And revelation: “Something revealed” (which is defined: “to uncover and allow to be seen”). (The Oxford English Dictionary, which provides context over time, makes clear that in the 1800’s revelation referred to “communication of knowledge to man by a divine or supernatural agency” – quite similar to our modern definition of inspiration. The OED confirms that inspiration is “special immediate influence or action of the Spirit of God upon the human mind or soul.” )

The Bible dictionary in the LDS scriptures confirms the definition of revelation: “The English word revelation is translated from a Greek word apocalypse, meaning to make known or uncover.”

The Bible dictionary continues: “Continuous revelation from God to his saints, through the Holy Ghost or by other means, such as vision, dreams or visitations, makes possible daily guidance along true paths.”

The Guide to the Scriptures, another study guide available at lds.org, says revelation is “communication from God to his children on earth. Revelation may come through the Light of Christ and the Holy Ghost by way of inspiration, visions, dreams, or visits by angels.” The same guide says inspiration is “divine guidance given to man by God. Inspiration often comes by the Spirit in a variety of ways to the mind or heart of a person.”

Of course the scriptures teach us about receiving personal revelation. Moroni reminds us that through the Holy Ghost we may know the truth of all things (Moroni 10:5). Section 6 of the Doctrine and Covenants reminds us of Oliver’s experience seeking a testimony of Joseph’s work. The Lord repeatedly reminds him that he spoke peace to Oliver’s mind. And in Section 8 the Lord teaches Oliver that answers will come in his mind and in his heart (verse 2). Finally Section 9 completes the triptych by counseling Oliver to study it out in his own mind before bringing a solution for ratification. That counsel is similar to Moroni’s in his 10:3 that we should ponder the circumstance under which we received the Book of Mormon before seeking to learn of its truth.

We see the pattern repeating itself in the modern church. Before President Hinckley announced in 1998 the audacious goal of 100 temples by the year 2000, he had spoken at conferences for the three years prior about how the subject of temples and temple work had weighed on his mind. He spoke of the need to bring temples closer to the people, and he introduced the rather revolutionary idea of smaller locally-staffed temples that could be built and operated at significantly lower cost than larger more traditional ones. Whether that direction came in a first person dictated revelation or through the process outlined in Section 9 is immaterial to me. The Prophet of the Lord was directed to make a radical change in the way temples can be built in order to advance the Lord’s work. As I attend one of those smaller temples today in my area, I feel the confirming witness of the Lord’s guidance in that direction.

Edward Kimball’s biography of President Spencer Kimball’s presidency details the process President Kimball followed in seeking and receiving revelation regarding the extension of priesthood blessings regardless of race – a long process of his actively seeking, and finally receiving, the Lord’s direction – and the process of President Kimball’s helping his fellow apostles to gain the same witness that he did. And President McKay’s biography by Prince and Wright confirms that he sought similar revelation but did not receive it. We do not have a text of the priesthood revelation, nor do we know the form it took, but we have accounts of the spiritual manifestations associated with it as the Lord’s will was revealed to his prophet.

Carol Clark writes in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

"Inspiration" and "revelation" are sometimes used interchangeably by LDS leaders in explaining the source of prophetic authority. The First Presidency of the Church said, "Moses wrote the history of the creation, and we believe that he had the inspiration of the Almighty resting upon him. The Prophets who wrote after him were likewise endowed with the Spirit of revelation" (MFP 2:232). President Wilford Woodruff later noted, "This Church has never been led a day except by revelation. And He will never leave it. It matters not who lives or who dies, or who is called to lead this Church, they have got to lead it by inspiration of Almighty God" (MFP 3:225). [MFP refers to Messages of the First Presidency.]

For me, the dichotomy between inspiration and revelation is a false one. I’m grateful for the revelation that guides the church, and the revelation I can receive of its truth.

Feeling the Spirit

Yesterday our bishop conducted a joint priesthood / Relief Society lesson. At the end he indicated that anyone who had come fasting and was in tune felt the spirit in our meeting.

I'm not one to take the words of my bishop lightly, but as he said that, I was slightly taken aback and thought, "I did?" I had come to the meeting fasting. And I was with him every step of the way in his presentation. But I hadn't (until he said it) really recognized the "burning" witness that I often identify as feeling the spirit.

In that instant, I had some choices: I could have assumed my bishop was wrong. I could have assumed that I was not as in tune as I had thought. Or I could have thought that maybe I felt the Spirit in a way that I hadn't previously identified. All three raced through my mind, and I settled on the third and began to think about the idea that maybe I had felt the spirit in a different way.

I've known for a long time that the spirit speaks to me in different ways sometimes. My knowledge comes from my own experience, coupled with what I've read in the scriptures. Over the years (I've been a member for over forty years – baptized at nearly nine years old), I've felt lots of things that I've identified with the Spirit, and some I've rejected over time and others I've held on to. So it's no surprise to me that I might feel the spirit in a new way.

Here are some ways I've felt the influence of the spirit:

I have felt a burning in the bosom, a warm stirring in my heart.

I have felt clarity of mind regarding particular questions.

I've felt a heart-pounding push to action – to bear my testimony, to speak to someone.

I've had thoughts and words come into my head that I know are not "mine", as when giving a blessing or sometimes when speaking or teaching.

For me, sometimes the influence of the Spirit is also accompanied by an emotional response. I've frankly worked hard to try and separate the emotional from the spiritual, since I also feel emotional responses when I watch movies and see pictures of puppies. (I'm a sensitive guy; what can I say?) So I try to think about an emotional response to spiritual things and to sense if there is more than just emotion there.

In yesterday's meeting, I did feel a noticeable peace as the bishop spoke. And it's a little surprising that I did. He spoke about a subject that is very emotional for me, namely the activity rate of youth in the church, and how we can help young men and women to choose to be active in the church. Because of my own family's experience, I have some bruises on that front, though those bruises have been healing over time as I take a longer and more sanguine view.

But it occurred to me in pondering the bishop's words that perhaps it was the Spirit that comforted me and allowed me to hear the bishop's message, to sense his urgency, and to think about what I could do with his message – for the children who are still in my home and others in our ward – without being weighed down by self pity about choices others of my children had already made years ago.

The bishop didn't deliver any silver bullets for youth activity in his remarks. This problem, like the poor, will always be with us. But feeling the Spirit comfort me while my bishop delivered a message that has been working on him for weeks and weeks (he could not wait for the fifth Sunday, he said, and he preferred to deliver it while the ward was fasting) reminds me that answers are not necessarily universal solutions but individual ones that may move us to touch just one life at a time.

In this case, at least one of those lives so touched was mine

Seeking Counsel

I've been engaged in a conversation about seeking counsel from church leaders over at another blog, and I decided to consolidate some of my thoughts on this subject.

A couple of premises from which I operate as a member of the LDS Church:

1. I have a testimony of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, and the restoration of priesthood authority which allows for administration of ordinances and the organization of the church.

2. Men and women who serve in leadership callings in the church are called by inspiration. The Fifth Article of Faith says they are called "by prophecy and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority to preach the gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof."

3. Those who serve come from a "lay" ministry. Although General Authorities serve full time, clergy in our church do not receive specific training in the ministry beyond what is available to us all: study of the scriptures and inspiration (or revelation) for their stewardship. Although local leaders (bishops and stake presidents) spend part of their time in offering counsel to individual members they are not particularly trained to do so; they do not receive academic training in their leadership capacity in psychology or counseling.

4. I have served as a bishop twice (once in Latin America and once in the United States), so I have my own experience, and I have spoken with others I know who have similarly served, but I am not aware of rigorous academic study of counseling practices among lay leaders in the LDS church.

5. Members generally respect the office of bishop and stake president; they have faith that men who hold those callings are called of God and can speak for Him. This faith comes from their experience with good men who have served in those roles, along with the teaching that we trust in the Lord and in His servants, and we accept inspired words as His words. Often seasoned members will respect the office more than they do an individual who serves in that office, meaning they recognize that the calling comes with certain gifts and blessings from the Lord. Seeking advice from your bishop is not the same as seeking advice from a trusted friend.

6. The men who serve in these callings are (in my experience) good men who do their best to serve in the way the Lord wants them to. They rely on their own experience (often as counselors to other bishops, for instance), on training they receive, on the scriptures, on the handbook of instructions and other church policy, and on personal pleas to the Lord for wisdom and guidance in specific cases. But these men are not perfect, and they are not infallible. Sometimes their counsel is limited by their own experience. Sometimes they do not know what they do not know. Sometimes they may not have read the latest policy, or do not remember it.

That last point may be troubling to some.

I remember a play I wrote when I was in college. In it, a bishop expressed private doubts to his stake president about a decision he had made as bishop. My father-in-law, a very faithful and somewhat conservative Latter-day Saint, was troubled by my characterizing the bishop as doubting, not because bishops do not have doubts, but because he worried that I might unfairly suggest that doubt is a regular part of a bishop's experience.

I do not believe that bishops spend a lot of time in doubt; they may simply not have time. In one ward I served, I easily spent twenty or more hours a week "bishoping" in addition to my 50-60 hours a week of work. (It was only later that I realized what a toll my service had on my family, and my next time around I tried to be more sensitive, though the time required really was more a sacrifice by my family than by me.)

Knowing that bishops are not perfect (I used to joke when I was a bishop that no one should think I was perfect, and if they did, they should consult my teenagers, who could set them straight), one might worry whether a bishop is acting under inspiration. This question seems to pop up often – wondering for instance when the General Authorities are speaking for themselves or for God. And of course the same question may apply for bishops and stake presidents.

The problems that may arise are easy to imagine. If we assume leaders are always inspired, we will be obedient, but may be troubled by discrepancies of history or finer points of doctrine or our own spiritual experiences. If we assume leaders are not always inspired then we are left with inevitable inconsistency in the application of their counsel.

Here are some ways I have come to terms with this question. These ideas are not new with me, but they do work for me.

1. If I receive a calling, I assume that calling is from the Lord. I know the process that most leaders follow when issuing a calling. Auxiliary leaders pray about the calling and offer inspired recommendations to bishoprics, and bishoprics pray to confirm the correctness of calls. Even if a call is uninspired, it would rarely be detrimental to accept it, but in my experience, the callings I've received have been great blessings to me, even if I was reluctant to accept initially. (I do remember one occasion when my wife received a calling she questioned. She asked if she could pray about it for a few days, sincerely not wanting to decline. By the following Sunday, the bishopric member who had issued the calling informed her that the bishopric had reconsidered and extended a different calling instead.) I remember sweet experiences extending calls where the person to be called seemed to be aware of the calling before I extended it. On one occasion, I was extending a release and in the middle of the interview I received the distinct impression that I should not extend the release after all, so I didn't. I am comfortable assuming that calls (and releases) come from the Lord, and I can seek that confirmation for myself, as well.

2. If I receive counsel over the pulpit, I assume it is the result of significant preparation. I understand that general authorities give a great deal of time and effort in preparing general conference talks. I have heard accounts of multiple drafts, reworking, rewording, and seeking the right nuance of meaning. If I have a concern about the counsel, I can seek my own confirming witness. I do not know if local leaders spend the same time and effort in their public addresses, and stories I hear suggest there is a wide variety of experience. I know the care I took when I spoke in sacrament meeting, and I try to assume that others do the same. (I reserve this position for counsel, but not necessarily for doctrine or history; if a bishop reads a source that has the history wrong, he may well repeat the wrong history.)

3. If I receive counsel in a blessing, I accept it as revelation for me. Elder Oaks' talk has caused me to think about this principle, and frankly I'm still working on it. But if my stake president were to give me a blessing that I sought, or pronounced a blessing while setting me apart, I would accept the words he spoke as revelation. This is particularly so if the blessing came after I had prepared myself and the person pronouncing the blessing had prepared himself. Of course I still have the opportunity to go to the Lord in private prayer to discuss particulars of a blessing for further understanding.

4. If I receive counsel in an interview, I try to have an open conversation with the interviewer to understand the counsel, why the interviewer recommends it, and how I should receive it (am I getting his opinion or am I getting inspired counsel?). Frankly, most often in an interview setting I'm told to go find my own answer. In fact, sometimes that's the answer I'm given in a blessing as well. In this kind of counsel, as in all counsel, I look for consistency with the scriptures, accepted church policy and the teachings of the prophets. When I gave counsel in an interview, I tried to hold to the same standard. One stake president suggested that the bishop in an interview should spend less than 20% of the time talking, and the other 80% praying for inspiration to say the right thing. Not bad advice.

I am grateful for the opportunity to receive personal revelation and for a faith which teaches me that is possible. I'm also grateful for inspired leaders who likewise receive revelation for their stewardships.