Council: To Obey Or Not?

[Sine Saw Square]

One of many underlying points of disagreement I've noticed on MDDB is differences of belief among practicing LDS members as pertains to "counsel" from General Authorities. I admire and respect those who try to adhere to all counsel they have received. I can also understand people who don't. I want to better understand where people on both sides (and in the middle?) are coming from.

These questions are intended for LDS members who accept the premise that the Church is what it claims to be. If you don't the issue is irrelevant. I'd like to keep this thread free from disparaging perspectives held by others. Questions and clarifications are fine but not condemnation or ridicule. Ok, here we go.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you believe we must strive to following all counsel given or suggested by General Authorities:

Is there an upward limit? In other words is it possible to go overboard? Examples?

If you believe we need follow commandments only and counsel is to be considered and headed at one's discretion:

What are your reasons for not obeying counsel? What harm would there be in doing so? Examples?

Edited December 23, 2011 by Sine Saw Square

[cinepro]

council

noun

1. an assembly of persons summoned or convened for consultation, deliberation, or advice.

counsel

noun

1. advice; opinion or instruction given in directing the judgment or conduct of another.

For me, "counsel" is something that stems from a General Authority's life experience and wisdom, but not necessarily from communication with God. Therefore, I treat it as I treat all counsel from people who are older and wiser than I am. I see how it applies to my personal circumstance, and apply it accordingly.

Edited December 23, 2011 by cinepro

[Peppermint Patty]

Sometimes the sheer volume of counsel and advice that we receive can be overwhelming. This can be a real problem for many women. I have close friends who feel a tremendous amount of guilt because they are not able to do EVERYTHING that is taught or counseled. I also have friends that are on anti-depressants, in part because of guilt they feel for not living up to the image of what we have been counseled/taught is the ideal woman in our Church and closely knit communities here in Utah.

I’m just a wife and a mom struggling to handle all the responsibilities thrown at me each day. But it is my prayer that I never loose focus on what matters most in this life. And that I seek God to give me His strength and His peace in my heart. I have to keep telling myself that the only advice that matters to me is that I am trying to improve and better myself. For everything else:

“Peace I leave with you. My peace I give to you. Not as the world gives, do I give to you. Let not your heart be troubled nor let it be afraid.” John 14:27

[Duncan]

For me, "counsel" is something that stems from a General Authority's life experience and wisdom, but not necessarily from communication with God. Therefore, I treat it as I treat all counsel from people who are older and wiser than I am. I see how it applies to my personal circumstance, and apply it accordingly.

I agree. You need to have a filter to weed out stuff. Just because something worked for someone else at another time and place and involved different people doesn't mean it will apply to my circumstances. The principle applies just not the exact practice of that principle. This was an exceedingly hard lesson I have had to learn in the Church.

[CV75]

double post

Edited December 23, 2011 by CV75

[CV75]

If you believe we must strive to following all council given or suggested by General Authorities:

Is there an upward limit? In other words is it possible to go overboard? Examples?

I am one who believes we must strive to follow all counsel given by General Authorities. While both are inspired, I see a difference I between counsel and commandments. I take counsel as aid and assistance in keeping the commandments under a particular set of conditions and circumstances that may or may not change from time to time and place to place, and I see commandments as the law of God’s kingdom.

Another difference I see between the two is that counsel seems to address the spirit of the law (commandments) and may assist in deeper, more personal reflection of the meaning and purpose of the commandments, which is probably why they may serve as a lightning rod for criticism even by the professed faithful.

To me, both counsel and commandments are different from policies and practices.

Of course it is possible to go overboard in striving to follow counsel. Mosiah 4:27 more immediately applies to retaining a remission of sin, but I think it can equally apply to counsel and commandments. Life is too short to detail examples of going overboard; I usually err on the side of cutting others some slack. When that seems counterproductive and it becomes my business, such an extreme (from my experience) is an exception that is better dealt with individually and on a personal basis.

[Bernard Gui]

The early Church also wrestled with this...

Take care that nobody tempts you away from the path of this Teaching,

for such a man's tuition can have nothing to do with God. If you can

shoulder the Lord's yoke in its entirety, then you will be perfect; but if

that's too much for you, do as much as you can.

The Didache:6

They, like we, were tempted away from the path, and we struggle to shoulder

the entire yoke.

Bernard

Edited December 23, 2011 by Bernard Gui

[Sine Saw Square]

For me, "counsel" is something that stems from a General Authority's life experience and wisdom, but not necessarily from communication with God. Therefore, I treat it as I treat all counsel from people who are older and wiser than I am. I see how it applies to my personal circumstance, and apply it accordingly.

Thanks for the grammar correction. Spelling was never my strong point. Fixed, except in the Title- maybe a moderator could be nice and correct that for me?

Toward your response- what kind of counsel would not apply to one's personal circumstances?

[Bernard Gui]

Much of the counsel we receive has to do with the stuff that distracts us and

diverts us from the path.

Bernard

[Sine Saw Square]

The early Church also wrestled with this...

They, like we, were tempted away from the path, and we struggle to shoulder

the entire yoke.

Bernard

In other words, do the best you can. I like that.

I think the issue revolves around what exactly is meant by the "entire yoke".

[Duncan]

Thanks for the grammar correction. Spelling was never my strong point. Fixed, except in the Title- maybe a moderator could be nice and correct that for me?

Toward your response- what kind of counsel would not apply to one's personal circumstances?

I will give you a real life example. In 2001 Elder X of the Twelve gave a CES devotional saying that you shouldn't wait to get married and they had x amount of kids before they could afford them. You could say well, if it worked for him then it should work for me. Ignore the fact that Elder X was going on to become a brilliant professional, ignore the fact that when he got married times were almost totally different and ignore the fact that his wife was generally supportive. Your circumstances are different then his, you aren't training to become what Elder X, and to make matters worse he read a letter from someone who was in training to do something similar and he just said well, they should solve their own problems. There would be less problems if people knew that it was just advice and not a commandment that you today get married in the exact same way that he did, 40 years before in a different set of circumstances.

[zerinus]

One of many underlying points of disagreement I've noticed on MDDB is differences of belief among practicing LDS members as pertains to "counsel" from General Authorities. I admire and respect those who try to adhere to all counsel they have received. I can also understand people who don't. I want to better understand where people on both sides (and in the middle?) are coming from.

These questions are intended for LDS members who accept the premise that the Church is what it claims to be. If you don't the issue is irrelevant. I'd like to keep this thread free from disparaging perspectives held by others. Questions and clarifications are fine but not condemnation or ridicule. Ok, here we go.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you believe we must strive to following all counsel given or suggested by General Authorities:

Is there an upward limit? In other words is it possible to go overboard? Examples?

If you believe we need follow commandments only and counsel is to be considered and headed at one's discretion:

What are your reasons for not obeying counsel? What harm would there be in doing so? Examples?

Your question presupposes a distinction between "counsel" and "commandant" which you need to specify, but haven't. What do you see as the difference between "counsel" and "commandment," and how do you propose distinguishing between them?

I have noticed that several posters have tried to supply that missing definition. But that definition needs to be supplied with the questions asked; because the answer to the questions will depend on the perspective of the questioner with regard to that distinction. You need to tell us how you propose distinguishing between a "counsel" and a "commandment," before expecting to receive a meaningful answer to your questions.

[LDSToronto]

One of many underlying points of disagreement I've noticed on MDDB is differences of belief among practicing LDS members as pertains to "counsel" from General Authorities. I admire and respect those who try to adhere to all counsel they have received. I can also understand people who don't. I want to better understand where people on both sides (and in the middle?) are coming from.

Counsel is advice - I find nothing inherently admirable about following advice nor do I find anything inherently admirable about following all advice from a particular source.

What I do find admirable are those who use intellect and experience to judge advice that they receive, and make decisions about whether to follow said advice based on rational, situational judgment.

H.

[LDSToronto]

If you believe we need follow commandments only and counsel is to be considered and headed at one's discretion:

What are your reasons for not obeying counsel? What harm would there be in doing so? Examples?

I believe everyone should choose to live by principles that they find compelling, reasonable, and applicable to their own life. Hence, I believe every commandment and every piece of counsel is open for scrutiny. Counsel should be followed if one finds a compelling reason to do so - following advice that is not applicable to your situation may result in a negative outcome to whatever situation you are in.

H.

Edited December 23, 2011 by LDSToronto

[Duncan]

Counsel is advice - I find nothing inherently admirable about following advice nor do I find anything inherently admirable about following all advice from a particular source.

What I do find admirable are those who use intellect and experience to judge advice that they receive, and make decisions about whether to follow said advice based on rational, situational judgment.

H.

exactley! and what is more never give advice to further only your own ego

Edited December 23, 2011 by Duncan

[Cobalt-70]

If you believe we must strive to following all counsel given or suggested by General Authorities:

Is there an upward limit? In other words is it possible to go overboard? Examples?

If you believe we need follow commandments only and counsel is to be considered and headed at one's discretion:

What are your reasons for not obeying counsel? What harm would there be in doing so? Examples?

From my perspective, the only thing that a member is bound by temple covenants to follow is: (1) commandments from God found in canonized scripture, and (2) direct orders form priesthood superiors, unless the Spirit of God directs otherwise (I add this last proviso because I don't think "I was just following orders" is an excuse for the rare instance where a Mormon might be directly ordered by priesthood leaders to do something that is clearly wrong, such as participating in the Mountain Meadows massacre).

I interpret "counsel" as generally good advice, based on (usually in my case, but not always) older and wiser souls, which I should certainly at least listen to. If someone is my priesthood leader, that obligates me to (1) follow their direct orders (with the above proviso), and (2) listen and consider their advice. But I will not blindly and automatically follow anyone's advice or counsel. The supreme counselor is the Holy Spirit, who knows me and the circumstances of whatever choices I face better than any priesthood leader can possibly hope. Thus, I will, and do, sustain the authority of my priesthood leaders, but that does not always require me to agree with them on every issue, nor is listening to them a substitute for my direct relationship with God.

This is why, with great reluctance and soul searching, I could not follow the church's counsel to go door-to-door in California spreading a message of discrimination in the campaign for California Proposition 8. I don't condemn anyone else who chose to do so, but I could not myself do it in good conscience. Nor could I, knowing as much as I do about American constitutional law and LGBT issues, have felt honest were I to have used the misleading and sometimes simply incorrect political talking points that were provided. The Holy Spirit and I are on the same wavelength here, though I really don't really think that God cares that much about such worldly political fights. Had I been alive in 1933, I would have respectfully disagreed with Heber J. Grant's counsel and voted in favor of the repeal of Prohibition, too, as did the majority of Utahns. But if, on the other hand, Pres. Monson had directly ordered me to vote in favor of discrimination against my gay and lesbian friends, I'd probably have felt bound by temple covenants to do so.

Edited December 23, 2011 by Cobalt-70

[Grundelwalken]

Several years ago I had an experience that has caused me to think about this topic in some depth.:

I was responsible to teach young people (14-18) on a regular basis and for one lesson we had discussed the counsel to not date until 16 years of age. Using the "For the Strength of Youth", we identified the prophets counsel about when and how to date.

A few days later I received a phone call from an irate parent, accusing me of interfering with the raising of a daughter. This particular YW had made it a point to state, in class, that HER parents had decided she was old enough and mature enough to date, even though she was only 15. As is my duty when teaching youth, I opened the FSOY and showed the young lady what the prophets have counseled and then suggested she pray for herself and see what the Lord might say.

The mother was now on the phone, angrily accusing me of leading her daughter astray. I answered that I had not told her daughter what to do but had tried to help her discover for herself what she should do as per the Brethren. The mother's reply was, "The guidelines in FSOY are only counsel, not commandment. If I decide that my child is ready to date at 15, I can make that decision."

I agreed with her and politely ended the conversation ----- but not before adding one final comment -- maybe I shouldn't have but MY ire was up just a bit. Anyway, when she stated that FSOY was only counsel and not commandment, I replied, "I'm not sure I always know the difference." Then she hung up on me.

Truthfully, it is often hard for me to tell the difference between counsel and commandment. Is the FSOY only counsel or are there things in there that might be counted as commandment? Does a conference message asking us all to be kinder and gentler to others count as commandment or just good counsel? I think the line is often very faded and difficult to see so I am more inclined to treat all counsel as commandment unless the Spirit dictates otherwise.

For instance, in an earlier post someone commented about (Elder Nelson?) a member of the 12 teaching that a family can have children even if they are not financially ready. Pres Kimball offered similar counsel when I was a newlywed. For me that was counsel that I should not look for excuses to delay children but should move on ahead in that part of God's work. It was, in effect, a commandment to me to begin my family even though I was in school (just starting) and had little income. Granted, this was also ratified by the Holy Ghost but I suggest that the only way to know for sure is by asking the right sources and then following through.

In my mind,Counsel and Commandment, when they come from a prophet and are supported by the Holy Ghost are synonymous. MW

[Grundelwalken]

From my perspective, the only thing that a member is bound by temple covenants to follow is: (1) commandments from God found in canonized scripture, and (2) direct orders form priesthood superiors, unless the Spirit of God directs otherwise (I add this last proviso because I don't think "I was just following orders" is an excuse for the rare instance where a Mormon might be directly ordered by priesthood leaders to do something that is clearly wrong, such as participating in the Mountain Meadows massacre).

Mostly I agree with this idea. But I would also add (3) Anything the Spirit has prompted me to do as part of my daily life.

One example (and I know this will seem TBM and fanatical to some) -- I believe it is my duty to dress appropriately when I attend the temple. I feel like it is an offense to God if I don't wear my very best, therefore, I will not attend the temple unless I wear a suit, a white shirt, have shaved properly, and am physically clean. In my mind and heart I feel that this is the Lord's commandment to me -- I do not hold anyone else to this standard and don't teach it as any kind of church doctrine. If someone asks, I will share my feelings but never try to force them to follow what I do.

It is important to remember that the Spirit can help us get closer to God by enhancing the existing commandments/counsel for our benefit. I know that some will say "but how much do we add or how do we protect from Pharisaical demands." The Spirit and listening will keep us safe. Good Luck. MW

[Bernard Gui]

What I do find admirable are those who use intellect and experience to judge advice that they receive, and make decisions about whether to follow said advice based on rational, situational judgment.

Some experiences are fatal. Nothing learned from those, except maybe by those who

witnessed the mistake. For example, "Don't stick that needle in your arm!" Counsel

is sometimes useful as we gain knowledge from the collective wisdom...Native Americans

call it tribal knowledge.

Bernard

Edited December 23, 2011 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

One example (and I know this will seem TBM and fanatical to some) -- I believe it is my duty to dress appropriately when I attend the temple. I feel like it is an offense to God if I don't wear my very best, therefore, I will not attend the temple unless I wear a suit, a white shirt, have shaved properly, and am physically clean. In my mind and heart I feel that this is the Lord's commandment to me -- I do not hold anyone else to this standard and don't teach it as any kind of church doctrine. If someone asks, I will share my feelings but never try to force them to follow what I do.

Kind of like teach correct principles, and let the people choose for themselves. Of course, there are consequences

for wrong choices.

Can anyone remember a recent conference in which we were commanded (in its forceful sense) to do something?

Bernard

[Duncan]

Mostly I agree with this idea. But I would also add (3) Anything the Spirit has prompted me to do as part of my daily life.

One example (and I know this will seem TBM and fanatical to some) -- I believe it is my duty to dress appropriately when I attend the temple. I feel like it is an offense to God if I don't wear my very best, therefore, I will not attend the temple unless I wear a suit, a white shirt, have shaved properly, and am physically clean. In my mind and heart I feel that this is the Lord's commandment to me -- I do not hold anyone else to this standard and don't teach it as any kind of church doctrine. If someone asks, I will share my feelings but never try to force them to follow what I do.

It is important to remember that the Spirit can help us get closer to God by enhancing the existing commandments/counsel for our benefit. I know that some will say "but how much do we add or how do we protect from Pharisaical demands." The Spirit and listening will keep us safe. Good Luck. MW

Edited December 23, 2011 by Duncan

[Sine Saw Square]

Your question presupposes a distinction between "counsel" and "commandant" which you need to specify, but haven't. What do you see as the difference between "counsel" and "commandment," and how do you propose distinguishing between them?

I have noticed that several posters have tried to supply that missing definition. But that definition needs to be supplied with the questions asked; because the answer to the questions will depend on the perspective of the questioner with regard to that distinction. You need to tell us how you propose distinguishing between a "counsel" and a "commandment," before expecting to receive a meaningful answer to your questions.

A wonderful challenge. That you for requesting me to be clearer. I wasn't more so because it seems like that is the issue. Everyone may have a different opinion on what constitutes commandment.

I regard the temple interview questions as a good foundation for what is we are commanded to do. Seems to me that scripture has the authority of command. In addition I consider things said by General Authorities when specifically identified as such to be "commandment". All that seems to give me more than I can handle. Seems like there are grey areas. But I'm open to learning if that isn't the case.

[Sine Saw Square]

Counsel is advice - I find nothing inherently admirable about following advice nor do I find anything inherently admirable about following all advice from a particular source.

What I do find admirable are those who use intellect and experience to judge advice that they receive, and make decisions about whether to follow said advice based on rational, situational judgment.

H.

What I admire is the desire to be obedient. I don't think that is easy. Those that I know who try to live this way don't get there out of naïveté or stupidity or fear. The people I refer to do so from a position of spiritual strength. I'm not saying that all people who strive to live in strict obedience do so from this position, though I find it remarkable that one could maintain such a lifestyle without thoughtful conviction. But even if that is the case... What harm is there in doing so?

[Duncan]

What I admire is the desire to be obedient. I don't think that is easy. Those that I know who try to live this way don't get there out of naïveté or stupidity or fear. The people I refer to do so from a position of spiritual strength. I'm not saying that all people who strive to live in strict obedience do so from this position, though I find it remarkable that one could maintain such a lifestyle without thoughtful conviction. But even if that is the case... What harm is there in doing so?

One of the best lines I ever read was from Paul Peterson's PH.D. Thesis on the Mormon reformation. He writes about a fella who was told to get married in a polygamous situation, he did, and it ended in disaster. Now for the line that I love, "I was obedient but not very wise" It is hard to think about doing something when you are used to being obedient and not to really question it, especially if you are young or just off a mission

Edited December 23, 2011 by Duncan

[zerinus]

A wonderful challenge. That you for requesting me to be clearer. I wasn't more so because it seems like that is the issue. Everyone may have a different opinion on what constitutes commandment.

I regard the temple interview questions as a good foundation for what is we are commanded to do. Seems to me that scripture has the authority of command. In addition I consider things said by General Authorities when specifically identified as such to be "commandment". All that seems to give me more than I can handle. Seems like there are grey areas. But I'm open to learning if that isn't the case.

Do you think these verses might help clarify the issue a bit:

D&C 21:

4 Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;

5 For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.

6 For by doing these things the gates of hell shall not prevail against you; yea, and the Lord God will disperse the powers of darkness from before you, and cause the heavens to shake for your good, and his name's glory.

D&C 68:

3 And this is the ensample unto them, that they shall speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost.

4 And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.