Tech Forum

Because of considerations for our Relief Society, we have a third counselor. I've noticed that in other organizations (e.g., Puerto Rico San Juan Mission) the third counselor simply has the title "Counselor" (e.g., "Mission Presidency Counselor"). I also noticed that when President Hinckley was serving as the third counselor in the First Presidency, he was always referred to in the conference reports simply as "a Counselor in the First Presidency". Is there any standard policy for naming third counselors, or do we simply decide?

dwsmith2 wrote:Because of considerations for our Relief Society, we have a third counselor. I've noticed that in other organizations (e.g., Puerto Rico San Juan Mission) the third counselor simply has the title "Counselor" (e.g., "Mission Presidency Counselor"). I also noticed that when President Hinckley was serving as the third counselor in the First Presidency, he was always referred to in the conference reports simply as "a Counselor in the First Presidency". Is there any standard policy for naming third counselors, or do we simply decide?

I don't see how the Handbook supports having a third counselor in the Relief Society. Your two examples deal with situations where the Handbook mentions nothing about the number of counselors, whereas the Handbook very definitely says that the Relief Society presidency has 2 counselors. This was discussed at some length in the thread 3rd Counselor in RS presidency not showing up with presidency on new lds.org.

dwsmith2 wrote:Because of considerations for our Relief Society, we have a third counselor. . . .
Is there any standard policy for naming third counselors, or do we simply decide?

We follow the pattern of the First Presidency, and call the person "a counselor in the . . ." Although we try to avoid calling third counselors, we have a number of units where there is a large basis of members needing special support (language, etc.). With area seventy approval in each case, we have called an additional counselor in some presidencies/bishoprics to meet the needs of those folks.

Of course, we could call them, "the official translator for the presidency," or something like that, I suppose.

lajackson wrote:We follow the pattern of the First Presidency, and call the person "a counselor in the . . ." Although we try to avoid calling third counselors, we have a number of units where there is a large basis of members needing special support (language, etc.). With area seventy approval in each case, we have called an additional counselor in some presidencies/bishoprics to meet the needs of those folks.

Of course, we could call them, "the official translator for the presidency," or something like that, I suppose.

That can work -- as long as you get approval, and understand that these "counselors" have custom callings (not standard callings) and thus will not show up on leadership directories, Officers Sustained forms, etc.

Thank you for your comments. For the time being I'll assume the Church does not have a standard policy on a title for third counselors.

In response to the first reply by aebrown on whether or not the handbooks allow for more than two counselors, I would point out that the Doctrine and Covenants "allows" for only two counselors in the First Presidency ("three presiding high priests" doesn't mean four presiding high priests), which is of course the norm in any presidency. But when circumstances dictate, there is nothing that prohibits a president from calling more than two counselors.

I think what you'll find is that the "3rd counsellor" is actually called as a specialist in a particular area - to meet a specific need. I'd be surprise to find a stake president who would authorise any of his wards to call an 'unspecified' 3rd counsellor. Don't forget - it's not the president's decision, it's the bishop - under the direction of the stake president.