Arbi: You just summed up one of the big reasons I was glad to leave Fort Collins. :hugs!:

--Ray

Coco, if someone has started obeying the commandment of food storage late in the game, I'm happy to help them in any way I can. But those parables you mention don't say anything about paying the laborer who never showed up for work. If someone bought a boat instead of food storage, they're not coming into the picture late in the process, they're not fulfilling the commandment at all.
And as for your earlier quoted bit from the church website, we're doing that as you speak. Many are going through hard times, and as we pay our fast offerings we help the Bishop help those who are less fortunate.

How about we take Bok's question one step further and say that the family with excessive debt who received your food storage is related to you? Does this make any difference in how you feel about it?

I see the fast offering angle, but this quote is from the new pamphlet, All Is Safely Gathered In, the one specifically about food storage.

I'm just throwing out some of my thoughts, because I struggle with the idea of "slackers" taking my stuff. I was talking to the Lord like, "What's the deal with sharing my hard-earned food and stuff with people who thumb their nose at it? What if my own family suffers because of that?"

Then I just got to thinking if this was the attitude that Christ and HF take with us? Their work is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. Us, rebellious, unworthy souls who largely thumb our noses at Them and Their doctrines. We, who are largely selfish all too focused on material things and wealth. What attitude do They take with me? ... I found myself asking that. What attitude do I take with those I consider "lesser?"

Just thoughts...

Yeah, I'd have a hard time helping slackers just because we share some DNA. I'd be thinking, This person is no less valuable to HF just cuz he's not related to me. But then again, we're supposed to take care of "our own" whatever that means.

Our favorite neighbors have lots of toys and lots of debt and zero food storage. They do things parenting-wise that we don't agree with. But when I think of apocalyptic scenarios, I only think of helping them how we can.

in terms of family, I know in that regard, one is always left wondering if perhaps someone in the family dropped the ball with the "undeserving wretch" and therefore the family accumulated guilt kinda kicks in and you wanna help them, as a way of taking care of your own... a sort of stewardship thing. :)

--Ray

Maybe it's my utter ignorance with how a bishop deals with temporal needs in a ward, but I just don't see a bishop saying, "sorry, you didn't get your food storage, so now you will starve while sister Bokbadok sits fat and happy on her bags of wheat."

I think we will be asked to share what we have with everyone who needs it. I also think that there will be those who turn their back on the church co-op and go with what the "new economy" can provide because it will promise a better diet than my wheat and oil, rice and beans can.

The way it works concerning temporal needs right now is basically this: The needs of a person are assessed and the Bishop works with that person to evaluate how to meet those needs. The Bishop first encourages the person to see if family can help meet those needs. If not, then the church will help. The primary method the Bishop uses to assist people is giving them free food, but they will also help with rent in order to keep a roof over someone's head.

I imagine that in any scenario where food storage is used the process would be the same. The Bishop would evaluate needs and determine methods to meet those needs. Is a member's individual food storage one of the tools available to meet needs of others? I think that's the only thing in question. If it's an available tool, yes, the Bishop has the right and the responsibility to use that tool as he is inspired to meet the needs of needy members. If it is not an available tool to him, then he will use whatever means he does have available to him, without touching your storage, that he can to meet the needs of that member. I have no idea what those methods would be in a food storage situation, because the Bishop's storehouse simply doesn't have enough food for everyone.

So let's discuss that point. Is your food storage available to the Bishop to use as he sees fit? In the current situation, I believe the answer would be no. If a member needs a car to get to work, the Bishop doesn't go to a member with an extra car and say, "Sign over the registration, this car is going to a needy member." The Bishop may ask the member to do that, but to my knowledge they don't command people in the use of their resources. For instance, the Bishop doesn't set quotas for everyone as to how much fast offerings they are expected to give each month to qualify for a temple recommend.

Now, how about in a survival situation? Does the Bishop tell the needy member to go to Sister Bok's home and pick up 2 bags of wheat? Or does he say, "I'm sorry, I can't help you, but go ask Sister Bok and see if she can help you." We've been talking about the United Order, and stewardships. To be honest, if we are living the United Order, it seems logical that whatever food you have would be divvied up amongst everyone according to needs. If we're not living the United Order, then I really can't see the Bishop assigning any part of your food storage to anyone. He would ask, he would suggest, but he wouldn't just assume that he can assign your stuff, even if a family with starving kids was sitting in front of him.

But I don't think that we'll be living the United Order in a food storage situation, and here's why: the United Order, like a marriage, needs to be made up of people who are not only willing to take, but willing to give. In some cases, in the United Order, all someone may have to give would be his labor. It's not how much you have to give, it's the attitude you have about giving it. If you start off with a group of people who never got going on food storage because they were too busy making or spending money, then add that to a group of people who have been sacrificing in order to fulfill the Lord's commandment, and you'd have a United Order that would be extraordinarily short lived.

Cause when you get down to it, it's the spiritual aspect that's important. The Lord could provide us with manna from heaven if He wanted. But He has told us early and often to get our food storage together to see if we will listen to Him.
What's more, I see such a situation as not only massively unjust, but also unmerciful. When you get right down to it, food storage is not going to save you in a situation where it's needed. Only the Lord will save you. If you haven't developed the faith to follow His commandment now when food storage may seem frivolous, you will not have the faith to get through a situation where there is a need for food storage. So, even if someone's food storage were distributed to you, you would not have the faith necessary to survive.
Think about it; the Lord doesn't give equal blessings to those who pay tithing and those who don't. Does it then seem likely that he would give the same blessings to both those who store food and those who don't?

It is also hard for me to imagine the logistics of sharing in a food storage situation. You who live in Utah may not appreciate this, but those of us in non-Utah wards frequently live a ways from our meetinghouse. It is hard for me to conceive of a situation where we're living off food storage but have no need to conserve gas. We're not going to be driving back and forth to the meetinghouse with our beans for the daily ward chili cookoff. Nor do many of us live that close to a large enough number of neighbors to make walking around with heavy packages of food all that practical. Not to mention the personal safety factor concerned in walking around with a lot of food when many are going hungry.

So, to sum up, unless all food is pooled as one resource under the United Order, we will not be required by our Bishop to share. The United Order seems extremely unlikely in a situation like that because of the extremely unequal people who would be participants.

It's interesting that we had a 5th Sunday lesson by our Bishopric a couple of days ago.  The topic was ER preparedness for the ward.  Basically, all households were given a survey which asked several questions.  Included were questions on needs (medications, medical conditions, other considerations) and what you had (how much food storage?  how many rooms in your home?  do you have first aide training, etc.).  As part of the Ward Welfare Committee, I've been in discussions on our ward emergency preparedness.

We haven't discussed the details yet, but since the survey is asking about food storage, I'm thinking that in a true Emergency situation (most likely would be natural disasters), our Bishop may ask us to share our food storage. 

I was thinking of this thread as I answered my survey (the information will be collected and analyzed to incorporate into our ward emergency plan).  Would I be willing to share my storage with people that should have been diligent at least as much as I?  I say yes now, but who knows if that'll be true if that situation arises.

bokbadok wrote:

---

It seems to me that in the process of a bishop counseling with a family applying for bishop's storehouse help should include counsel about reducing costs as much as possible as part of their effort to make ends meet in addition to receiving help from the ward. Discretionary things, like cable TV/internet, preschool, dance/music lessons, etc. Things that are nice and fun, but not necessary. In my limited experience, that doesn't happen.  

---

Bok, that's because their bishop didn't counsel with them.  I've learned alot from my current bishop.  We had a similar situation.  Except this family had received help from our ward for over 5 years!  The previous bishop was too soft-hearted to have a real conversation with this family to make sure they understood the principle behind the assistance and instead just gave the assistance.  Our current bishop counseled with them, did a needs/analysis, and gave them a deadline on helping themselves.  

I've witnessed the crapshoot as well. We had some "travelling members" who would basically ward-hop around town. When the funds ran low, they'd move on to a better bishop. We have a bishop right now that indulges many "discretionary" things such as high-speed internet coming out of fast offerings. This wardhopping family probably stayed in our ward the longest. It was truly the scam of scams.

I appreciate that post, arbi. Still thinking on everything...

I'm NOT pointing out the Little Dipper until you GIVE ME THE APPLE PIE!

I think any sharing of food storage will be situationally based. Immediate disaster like earthquakes, tornados, etc., where things may have been wiped out, that is one thing. OTOH a situation such as famine, war, severe rationing, etc., that is altogether different and harkens to what mirk posted in quoting Pres. Benson.

In situations such as famine, unless I feel impressed to do so, my wife and children will not go hungry, I will not hear the cries of my hungry children. No one has the right to ask you to jeopardize your family for failing of another to prepare.

This, I think, clearly falls under the discussion of the Parable of the 10 Virgins.

I realize there can be exceptions, an elderly person with little or no income, but when people are capable. Even when we made only a little money, and extra couple cans of peaches, tuna, whatever, a bag of rice. Or people's storage looted or lost, but for the guy with the mustang and in ground pool or whatever, I don't think so.

So I was thinking about this some more.

One of the problems I have with the idea of no private ownership, is the problem of accountability for property owned by the community. Let's say that my ward started living the LoC/UOrder tomorrow. I would contribute, among other things, a large, quality tiller and a new grain mill to the neighborhood equipment pool.

What happens when my well meaning but careless neighbor uses the grain mill, clogs it up and ruins it, and therefore my neighborhood is now without a grain mill?

It's a sad fact that most people don't take very good care of things that they didn't pay for. I've lent out multiple tools that have come back to me in poor repair or ruined. It bugs me.

I think you have to relinquish all material attachment in order to live the Law of Consecration to its fullest. The focus is not on you or your stuff, it's upon how you can build up others. Despite our fixation on making a living, and other stuff, I think most stewardships that are discussed in scripture regard building up people for whom we have responsibility.

I imagine then that our attachment to our things will be supplanted for our love for each other. I think we get a glimmer of that when we are parents and our kids destroy everything we once cherished. :) Even though sometimes we feel loss, and have to go without, our children are ultimately more important than any earthly possession.

--Ray

Arbi has it right from what I have had explained to me. Everything you have goes into a "pool".  You and the bishop then sit down together and determine what you need (note you and the bishop decide that together) and whatever excess is left over, returns to the pool for distribution.

It seems a strange objection to suggest that because such and such breaks the wheat grinder, you're not willing to live the Law of Consecration.
I didn't say that.  I'm asking how it works.

Rather than judge the state of my heart, why don't we stick to the discussion at hand?

I agree that people need to be trained in how to use and care for equipment.  My mistake in lending tools in the past has been to assume that people have common sense.  So I guess training would help with the situation that I asked about.  Thanks everyone for your replies.

Ray, you say you think the system will be designed to take care of fears (such as breaking things due to carelessness).  I'm trying to think of how this would work.  I look at our current system in the church--welfare.  Far from being the UO/LoC, I know.  But it is God-inspired. 

I look at how this system works now.  Technically, if someone receives assistance from the church, this person/family should "earn" the assistance.  They can work in the family history center, clean the ward building, help another member, etc.  But, what I find as reality is that only a few of assisted members work to earn the assistance (I'm not talking about dollar for dollar earnings--just doing something that the Bishop has asked/suggested).

So, if we live UO/LoC, I think we're going to find some of the same level of committment with people.  Even among temple-endowed members.  I wonder how this would be worked out.    Honestly, I don't know.  Perhaps, my mortal mind cannot grasp the logistics of this.  My mortal, selfish nature cringes at the thought of sharing my stuff with them.  That's my failing and possibly a test I have to pass.

I always pictured the LoC/UO as being more bartering, too. And nobody really "in debt" to anyone else - everyone working to support themselves. I think there will be a lot more working under the Loc/UO (that's hard to type) too. Unless you physically cannot, you will be doing *something* that needs to be done.

I wonder... will this be brought on us by some outward/worldly circumstance... some need for it? Or more like by choice?

You mean like greed, selfishness, and laziness?

Yes to bok and I agree with your perception to hic.

All the unworthy who didn't have food storage will be dead - and that will take care of the lazy ones.

And then they'll take half of Coco's land and give it to me!

Yearning for a KickintheAss Ranch

People are willing to be greedy with whatever resource is available. The Israelites went out to gather manna on the Sabbath because the double portion the day before wasn't good enough for them.
There are several ways to be lazy and careless with next to no resources. How about not finishing the portion of food given to you? Right now it's not a big deal if you don't finish your Hardee's Monster Thickburger because you can always buy another one. But what about someone who doesn't want to finish their bowl of bulgar wheat in a survival situation? That's the same as stealing from the group, because it's a very limited resource.
Heck, anyone seen the film "The Gods Must be Crazy"? That tribe of bushmen couldn't share one glass bottle. Here is a group of people that has as little as it is possible to have and still stay alive, and they couldn't share one glass bottle.
It's not how much you have, it's your attitude.