Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
HappyJackWagon

Update from Newsroom on Pres. Monson

Recommended Posts

Just by way of info...

Quote

Because of limitations incident to his age, President Monson is no longer attending meetings at the Church offices on a regular basis. He communicates and confers with his counselors on matters as needed. President Monson is grateful that the work of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles continues without interruption. He appreciates the prayers and support of Church members.

 

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/president-monson-update

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Thanks for the post.  Should we expect another counselor to be added to the First Presidency?  It seems it would be prudent.  

Also, who do you think is taking more of a leadership role in the current FP?  Uchtdorf or Eyring?  If I remember right, Pres. Hinckley was a strong leader during both the Kimball and Benson years.  Is leadership more a function of personality and drive than actual position?  I'm thinking its a combination of personality and position, but I wonder.  

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks for the post.  Should we expect another counselor to be added to the First Presidency?  It seems it would be prudent.  

Also, who do you think is taking more of a leadership role in the current FP?  Uchtdorf or Eyring?  If I remember right, Pres. Hinckley was a strong leader during both the Kimball and Benson years.  Is leadership more a function of personality and drive than actual position?  I'm thinking its a combination of personality and position, but I wonder.  

I don't think they've added additional counselors since Kimball had 3 (IIRC). Monson and Hinkley ran things from the end of Kimball, Benson, Hunter years. I don't know who would call for additional counselors. Would it be from within the 1st Presidency requesting help, or would it be a suggestion from the Q12? In the past, some additional counselors weren't members of the Q12 so the "extra help" could come from anywhere, if needed.

I do think that leadership is largely personality, though position surely helps. I'm reminded of the succession crisis and the competition for power between Sidney Rigdon and Brigham Young. Brigham certainly had the strong, authoritative personality that obviously won out over Rigdon who was 1st Counselor in the 1st Presidency.

Share this post


Link to post

The internet and cell phones may have made it easier to keep traveling Presidents connected so the need of an assistant to cover gaps is less likely, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I don't think they've added additional counselors since Kimball had 3 (IIRC). Monson and Hinkley ran things from the end of Kimball, Benson, Hunter years. I don't know who would call for additional counselors. Would it be from within the 1st Presidency requesting help, or would it be a suggestion from the Q12? In the past, some additional counselors weren't members of the Q12 so the "extra help" could come from anywhere, if needed.

I do think that leadership is largely personality, though position surely helps. I'm reminded of the succession crisis and the competition for power between Sidney Rigdon and Brigham Young. Brigham certainly had the strong, authoritative personality that obviously won out over Rigdon who was 1st Counselor in the 1st Presidency.

Its a great question, what is the process to request a new counselor in the FP?  Would the ailing Pres. Monson need to make the proposal, or would the other counselors in the FP make an appeal to the Quorum for help?  And how did this happen in the past, I would be very interested to know the dynamics.  

I think you're right that personality has had a lot to do with power, politics definitely plays a large role.  

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Its a great question, what is the process to request a new counselor in the FP?  Would the ailing Pres. Monson need to make the proposal, or would the other counselors in the FP make an appeal to the Quorum for help?  And how did this happen in the past, I would be very interested to know the dynamics.

I think you're right that personality has had a lot to do with power, politics definitely plays a large role.

A counselor is just that.  Someone called to be a counselor to a presiding office.  They don't even need a specific priesthood office (not all counselors in the FP have been apostles).
President Monson can call anyone he likes to be one of his counselors.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Calm said:

The internet and cell phones may have made it easier to keep traveling Presidents connected so the need of an assistant to cover gaps is less likely, imo.

I think they've also delegated more since those days.  In the past, I believe all of the apostles served on boards of directors for different corporations that the church had investments in, and now that is no longer one of their responsibilities from my understanding.  But I don't know the specifics.  

Who's really running the show, are there powerful positions below the apostles that are pulling the major strings behind the scenes?  I know people speculate this about our President in the US Government all the time, and I wonder if this is also possible within the LDS hierarchy.  

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

A counselor is just that.  Someone called to be a counselor to a presiding office.  They don't even need a specific priesthood office (not all counselors in the FP have been apostles).
President Monson can call anyone he likes to be one of his counselors.

Learning about this was fascinating to me the first time I read about it.  I don't think most members are aware that we've had counselors in the FP that weren't ordained as apostles in the past.  Or even that we've had apostles in the past that weren't officially part of the quorum of the 12.  Lots of scenarios that might seem quite odd looked at through a modern lens.   

Edited by hope_for_things

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

A counselor is just that.  Someone called to be a counselor to a presiding office.  They don't even need a specific priesthood office (not all counselors in the FP have been apostles).
President Monson can call anyone he likes to be one of his counselors.

So if a presiding officer isn't capable of requesting additional counselors, would it be impossible to call another?

Or similarly, if a member of the FP were to die while the prophet is incapacitated, would that position remain unfilled?

On a practical level we really know very little about how the organization of the church functions.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

So if a presiding officer isn't capable of requesting additional counselors, would it be impossible to call another?

Or similarly, if a member of the FP were to die while the prophet is incapacitated, would that position remain unfilled?

On a practical level we really know very little about how the organization of the church functions.

I would say it's impossible under correct priesthood protocols.  But that doesn't mean that the Church wouldn't make an administrative exception.

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I don't think they've added additional counselors since Kimball had 3 (IIRC). Monson and Hinkley ran things from the end of Kimball, Benson, Hunter years. I don't know who would call for additional counselors. Would it be from within the 1st Presidency requesting help, or would it be a suggestion from the Q12? In the past, some additional counselors weren't members of the Q12 so the "extra help" could come from anywhere, if needed.

 

According to Ed Kimball's biography of his father, the additional counselor for President Kimball was because both of his counselors were in poor health (N. Eldon Tanner had Parkinson's Disease, and Marion G. Romney had restricted eyesight and health).

Edited by cinepro

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

I think they've also delegated more since those days.  In the past, I believe all of the apostles served on boards of directors for different corporations that the church had investments in, and now that is no longer one of their responsibilities from my understanding.  But I don't know the specifics.  

Who's really running the show, are there powerful positions below the apostles that are pulling the major strings behind the scenes?  I know people speculate this about our President in the US Government all the time, and I wonder if this is also possible within the LDS hierarchy.  

The US president is a totally different situation. Often to get support and get elected US Presidents are beholden to certain men or groups, and in that sense may be viewed as puppets of those who "got them elected." 

It is a very different situation to the Church, whose president is supposed to be chosen by revelation. Since they have taken to a tradition of the senior-most apostle being nominated, this seems to really limit the possibility of the Church President being beholden to any specific people in the quorum of the 12 or elsewhere, so in that sense, I believe the practice is good. However, it is far from the free election by which Brigham Young became Church president which would eliminate this type of speculation altogether - at least in the short run. My main "concern" about the process is that it seems only financially successful members get called to be apostles. This raises the possibility that there are business concerns coming into play in the operations of the Church, rather than strictly inspired leadership. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

My main "concern" about the process is that it seems only financially successful members get called to be apostles. This raises the possibility that there are business concerns coming into play in the operations of the Church, rather than strictly inspired leadership. 

I think the criteria is more that they have show themselves to be successful leaders,  as well as being faithful members of the church who have extensive experience in church leadership, and they are called by God through revelation. 

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

The US president is a totally different situation. Often to get support and get elected US Presidents are beholden to certain men or groups, and in that sense may be viewed as puppets of those who "got them elected." 

It is a very different situation to the Church, whose president is supposed to be chosen by revelation. Since they have taken to a tradition of the senior-most apostle being nominated, this seems to really limit the possibility of the Church President being beholden to any specific people in the quorum of the 12 or elsewhere, so in that sense, I believe the practice is good. However, it is far from the free election by which Brigham Young became Church president which would eliminate this type of speculation altogether - at least in the short run. My main "concern" about the process is that it seems only financially successful members get called to be apostles. This raises the possibility that there are business concerns coming into play in the operations of the Church, rather than strictly inspired leadership. 

I would agree that the specific dynamics are different, but there are similarities and the political nature of the hierarchy that I've read about has convinced me that there have been multiple power plays in the past.  Not just the first succession crisis with BY, but the next two or three deaths of the president, along with other issues with how they consider seniority, whether seniority should continue to be the method (some leaders were pushing for a change there), who's in charge when the president is ailing, senior apostle power vs. junior ones, coalitions that seem to form in the quorum, and all kinds of dynamics of a political nature.  

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I think the criteria is more that they have show themselves to be successful leaders,  as well as being faithful members of the church who have extensive experience in church leadership, and they are called by God through revelation. 

I don't think Jesus' business acumen was relevant. Also hardly seemed to be the case with Joseph Smith. That's all I'm saying - it just seems a little askew. Since when does business acumen = gift of revelation? Anyway, that is getting off topic, and isn't an issue of the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

I don't think Jesus' business acumen was relevant. Also hardly seemed to be the case with Joseph Smith. That's all I'm saying - it just seems a little askew. Since when does business acumen = gift of revelation? Anyway, that is getting off topic, and isn't an issue of the thread.

Where did I say anything about the Savior and business acumen?  Where in the world did that comment come from?   I never said anything about business acumen.  I said those chosen by revelation to be apostles had shown themselves to be successful leaders who were faithful and experienced in church leadership. 

I also never equated business acumen with the gift of revelation.  Please do not put words in my mouth or imply, directly or indirectly, that I said that revelation had anything to do with business. 

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Where did I say anything about the Savior and business acumen?  Where in the world did that comment come from?   I never said anything about business acumen.  I said those chosen by revelation to be apostles had shown themselves to be successful leaders who were faithful and experienced in church leadership. 

I also never equated business acumen with the gift of revelation.  Please do not put words in my mouth or imply, directly or indirectly, that I said that revelation had anything to do with business. 

Then I don't see your response to me as being particularly relevant to my concern that "financial success" seems to be reflected. Oftentimes the Lord's choices are hated men. The "accepted" prophets teach what the people want to hear. The Lord's prophets tend to be chased out and persecuted. Most people were not ready for the truths taught by Joseph Smith - still today only a small percentage of people accept it.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't see them calling another counselour, I think they'd wait until someone dies and then change it up again. Past Presidents have done stuff from their houses' on their declining days

Share this post


Link to post

Since it's nonomybeeswax I will await the inevitable announcement and later watch for the white smoke. Problem is, I'm not sure which chimney to focus on. B:)

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, cinepro said:

According to Ed Kimball's bio, the additional counselor for President Kimball was because both of his counselors were in poor health (N. Eldon Tanner had Parkinson's Disease, and Marion G. Romney had restricted eyesight and health).

That reminds me of one of my favorite President Romney stories.  He was giving an address, and his eyesight wouldn't allow him to read off of a teleprompter then (though they're probably a lot more advanced now that they were in "them thar" days: the font size can probably be increased to, say, 36 points, or maybe even bigger).  But, then, he, in the likely absence of such technology, had to read off of a hard-copy text.  He was giving an awesome (and I do mean awesome: even I, as a young priesthood holder then, was quite impressed  ;)) address on priesthood power.  Suddenly, he stopped and was silent for several seconds when he realized the pages of his address weren't all in their proper order.  There was some paper shuffling, and he looked up and said, in his characteristic measured delivery, "I don't have the power to find the pages."  It was pretty funny.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks for the post.  Should we expect another counselor to be added to the First Presidency?  It seems it would be prudent.  

Also, who do you think is taking more of a leadership role in the current FP?  Uchtdorf or Eyring?  If I remember right, Pres. Hinckley was a strong leader during both the Kimball and Benson years.  Is leadership more a function of personality and drive than actual position?  I'm thinking its a combination of personality and position, but I wonder.  

Pres Eyring is senior (first counselor), and Uchtdorf is not the kind to boss people around.  He will be very deferential to the first counselor, and even to the Twelve.

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Pres Eyring is senior (first counselor), and Uchtdorf is not the kind to boss people around.  He will be very deferential to the first counselor, and even to the Twelve.

Interesting, Eyring doesn't come across as a strong personality type either.  

Share this post


Link to post

 

"Aging LDS Church President Thomas S. Monson has decreased his regular, day-to-day involvement in leadership meetings, a church spokesman said Tuesday of the 89-year-old Mormon prophet.
“Because of limitations incident to his age, President Monson is no longer attending meetings at the church offices on a regular basis,” said Eric Hawkins, spokesman for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. “He communicates and confers with his counselors on matters as needed.
“President Monson is grateful that the work of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles continues without interruption. He appreciates the prayers and support of church members.”

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865680602/LDS-Church-updates-condition-of-President-Thomas-S-Monson.html

Critics love to complain about how the church abuses it's elder leaders by making them work so hard into their golden years. "Let the poor old men retire in peace" they say.
They don't seem to understand the faith and devotion and the strength God gives them to be able continue on longer than most men their age. And you could not stop them anyway.
In the end they always know when it's the right time to slow down and let others take the lead.

Edited to add that I did not see this subject is already in the General Discussions page instead of here in the news section where it should be.

Edited by JAHS

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

Interesting, Eyring doesn't come across as a strong personality type either.  

He has always been an unassuming man. He has a powerful personality but he would be more like a President Hunter instead of a President Hinckley when in charge.

This is one key difference in modern church leadership. Respect for the office is strong in the Twelve. Even if President Uchtdorf or Holland or someone with that kind of charisma could lead by personality alone they would defer to the man with the Priesthood Keys.

Edited by The Nehor

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Duncan said:

I don't see them calling another counselour, I think they'd wait until someone dies and then change it up again. Past Presidents have done stuff from their houses' on their declining days

"Counselour"? Are you speaking Canadian again? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...