ROBOTIC ARMS

I have been a member of the church for my whole life and have actually never thought of some of the practices that we do until just recently. I think that is because there are many things that have been taught, or done for so long that we automatically take them for granted or do them out of reflex.

One of the most important and probably most overlooked is our practice of sustaining people in the church, stake or ward. As I recall, the early church that Joseph Smith restored did everything by vote. If something needed to be done or approved, it was done by the vote of the people. We even saw this happen after his death when Brigham Young and Sidney Rigdon sought to be named as the guardian of the church and it was taken before the people.

Since then we have established the doctrine of “robotic arms” as I would call them.

It goes like this: We go to church and the person presiding will get up and release someone from the calling that they’ve been serving in and then ask for a “vote of thanks” from the members of the congregation and asks the people to affirm the decision by raising the right hand. And then like robots, the right hands of the congregation go heavenward. For the life of me I don’t know why we need to give them a vote of thanks. Can’t we just give them a handshake and call it good, or do nothing except to look at them and notice the look of relief that is on their face? There was a time when one of the sisters in the ward was released as chorister and I didn't raise my hand as an affirmation that I wanted her released. The fellow sitting next to me said, "You know you're going to get in trouble for that." and I replied, "Well, I think that she does a great job and so I don't want her released; so I'm not voting her out."

Next is the “sustaining vote”. This happens every time that someone gets put into a new calling or position in the congregation, ward, stake or church. Normally the person’s name is read, they’ve been asked to stand so that everybody can see who they are and then the person presiding will ask for a “sustaining vote.” It normally goes like this, “We have asked Sister Threecowwife to be the coordinator for all of the chairs in the Relief Society room; all in favor sustaining this will show it by the raise of hand.” And, all of the hands once again shoot heavenward. They will then ask for any opposed to signal it by the same sign. The robotic hands have spoken.

That got me to thinking, ‘do we know what sustain means?’ Do I even know who the person is? Do I even know or think that the person can even do the job? So I decided to look up the word ‘sustain’ to see what I was getting myself into, and was amazed at what I found.

The definition is:

1.       Strengthen or support physically, or mentally.

2.       Undergo or suffer (something unpleasant, especially an injury)

3.       Uphold, affirm, or confirm the justice of validity of.

So, there you have it. I then had to ask myself if I was willing to support, uphold, confirm, strengthen or undergo or suffer for someone. And the answer was, I don’t think so; primarily because I don’t know them or I don’t know them well enough, or I don’t have a testimony of who they are and the position that they’ve been asked to occupy. Certainly a policy maker or decision maker would have to have my faith and confidence before I raised my hand. The best thing about it is that nobody can ask me the question, “You sustained him/her didn’t you?” And I and rightfully answer, “No, I didn’t.”

I'm not taking the 'fence sitting' approach here, I'm just not committing to anything without a confirmation of the Spirit.

There will be more written on this topic as time goes by, but as for now, my robotic arm has been tied to my side and will not be jumping up and down at the mention of the next “sustaining vote.”

What do you think?