Obedience To Leaders

[LDSToronto]

I've heard it said that we should be obedient to our leaders, and if those leaders ever lead us astray, it is on their heads and not ours.

A friend brought this quote to light:

""We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them -- even if they knew it was wrong. But such obedience as this is worse than folly to us. It is slavery in the extreme. The man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings until he turns from his folly. A man of God would despise this idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the Saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without any questions. When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves." -- Joseph Smith, Jr. in the Millennial Star, volume 14, number 38, pages 593-595."

Thoughts?

H.

[Calm]

I thought you've said you were no longer LDS. If so, then why are you saying "we" and "our leaders" in referring to LDS church leaders?

To the topic:

http://www.fairlds.org/authors/misc/ata-do-mormons-believe-in-blind-obedience

Edited March 14, 2012 by calmoriah

[zerinus]

I've heard it said that we should be obedient to our leaders, and if those leaders ever lead us astray, it is on their heads and not ours.

A friend brought this quote to light:

""We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them -- even if they knew it was wrong. But such obedience as this is worse than folly to us. It is slavery in the extreme. The man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings until he turns from his folly. A man of God would despise this idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the Saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without any questions. When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves." -- Joseph Smith, Jr. in the Millennial Star, volume 14, number 38, pages 593-595."

Thoughts?

H.

I don't have any problems with it; but there is a danger of taking it too seriously. If you are going to disobey your leaders because you think they are wrong, you had better be pretty sure that they are wrong, and you are right. That may be easier said than done. It is too easy to blame the leader when in fact the fault is with us, and we just don't want to obey.

Edited March 14, 2012 by zerinus

[Saints Alive]

As long a they don't ask me to do anything illegal, unethical or immoral I have no reason to question them.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Thoughts?

First, the quote is from an unsigned article in the 13 November 1852 Millennial Star, not from Joseph Smith at all (link). (I'm a professional historian; these things matter to me.)

Second, the spirit of the quote is correct...and something which has been taught clearly by the prophets of God since the beginning of this dispensation. One of my other favourite statements on the matter comes from Brigham Young:

I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually.

Exactly two weeks ago, my stake president met with me and extended a calling. In response, I told him I had no personal reservations but would like to enquire of the Lord before accepting. He said he knew I'd feel that way and asked if I thought I could get back to him by Saturday evening. I said I thought I could. After work Friday, I took a couple of my Young Men and drove the 300km to the temple, attending the baptistery the next morning. As I was standing in the font, smack in the middle of an ordinance, God gave me to 'know for myself.' Needless to say, I joyfully accepted the calling upon my return. Now my service is an issue between God and me, not between me and my stake president.

Edited March 14, 2012 by Hamba Tuhan

[Verum]

As long a they don't ask me to do anything illegal, unethical or immoral I have no reason to question them.

Which wouldn't happen...since church authorities have never asked members to do anything like that historically..........

[Sky]

I've heard it said that we should be obedient to our leaders, and if those leaders ever lead us astray, it is on their heads and not ours.

A friend brought this quote to light:

""We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them -- even if they knew it was wrong. But such obedience as this is worse than folly to us. It is slavery in the extreme. The man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings until he turns from his folly. A man of God would despise this idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the Saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without any questions. When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves." -- Joseph Smith, Jr. in the Millennial Star, volume 14, number 38, pages 593-595."

Thoughts?

H.

As long as we go with what the majority of the Brethren are teaching (the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve), then I really believe we don’t have anything to worry about.

Pay close attention to General Conference in two and a half weeks – the messages will probably center on living more Christ-like lives. Nothing wrong with that.

If you believe they are wrong about something, then pray about it. Take it to the Lord. Or just go with your gut. Nobody will stop you. Gently try to persuade you otherwise, yes. But nobody will stop you.

I honestly wish you the best with wherever your life takes you.

[Saints Alive]

Which wouldn't happen...since church authorities have never asked members to do anything like that historically..........

so do you have any examples?

[Verum]

so do you have any examples?

Isn't polgamy one that fits into the "illegal" category?

[LeSellers]

Isn't polgamy one that fits into the "illegal" category?

Plural Marriage was thought to be covered by the I amendment to the Constitution. Even William A. Beatty, an outspoken opponent of the Principle, essentially conceded the point, although the Supreme Court characteristically disagreed.

All that is "against the law" is not necessarily "illegal" because we have had myriads of laws that were not legitimate on constitutional grounds, not to mention moral and logical grounds. It's illegal, for example, according to the Food and Drug Administration, to tell people that tart cherries are as good as aspirin for pain relief. (I'm not telling you that, please note, just reporting the legal issue involved.)

I conclude that engaging in Plural Marriage as a function of religious principles is not, nor ever was, legitimately illegal. For those who believe that any law is valid, the opinion may vary.

Lehi

Edited March 14, 2012 by LeSellers

[Damien the Leper]

I've heard it said that we should be obedient to our leaders, and if those leaders ever lead us astray, it is on their heads and not ours.

A friend brought this quote to light:

""We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them -- even if they knew it was wrong. But such obedience as this is worse than folly to us. It is slavery in the extreme. The man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings until he turns from his folly. A man of God would despise this idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the Saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without any questions. When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves." -- Joseph Smith, Jr. in the Millennial Star, volume 14, number 38, pages 593-595."

Thoughts?

H.

Everything a religious leader of any denomination says must be taken with a grain of salt. Just as we do with all other people. If someone doesn't get any confirmation on an issue...don't sweat it. It's not worth freaking out over.

As someone said before, the spirit of the message is correct. Obedience isn't simply doing as told or as asked. Obedience is conscious awareness and discernment prior to taking action.

[Gohan]

Was reading over this thread, and this quote popped into my head, thought it'd be worth tossing it into the discussion.

Joseph F. Smith said on September 3, 1892,

"Concerning the question of blind obedience. Not a man in this Church, since the Prophet Joseph Smith down to the present day, has ever asked any man to do as he was told blindly. No Prophet of God, no Apostle, no President of a Stake, no Bishop, who has had the spirit of his office and calling resting upon him, has ever asked a soul to do anything that they might not know was right and the proper thing to do. We do not ask you to do anything that you may not know it is your duty to do, or that you may not know will be a blessing for you to do.

If we give you counsel, we do not ask you to obey that counsel without you know that it is right to do so. But how shall we know that it is right? By getting the Spirit of God in our hearts, by which our minds may be opened and enlightened, that we may know the doctrine for ourselves, and be able to divide truth from error, light from darkness and good from evil."

From Joseph F. Smith, Collected Discourses, ed. Brian H. Stuy, Vol. 3 (Burbank, B.H.S. Publishing, 1987-1992)

Edited March 14, 2012 by Gohan

[BCSpace]

I've not noticed any teachings or exhortations to follow blindly. In fact, the faith that the Church teaches is not blind but includes evidence and substance.

[cdowis]

Hey, LDSToronto, speaking of obedience, be sure to keep us updated with your NFS login.

Thread banned for off-topic driveby.

[rongo]

I wrote a lengthy paper that addressed how Brigham Young, et. al. threaded the needle of "blind obedience" and "follow the prophet / the prophet can never lead us astray."

http://www.fairlds.org/authors/jones-mckay/well-nigh-as-dangerous

Toronto, there are *many* statements that support your Joseph Smith quote in the opening post. One I really like is this one from B.H. Roberts (footnote 28):

I know that some men . . . have advanced extravagant ideas . . . that the people must go on performing their daily duties without question, and then if the President should do wrong, God would look after him. Such teachings have now and then been heard; but I call your attention to the fact . . . that the Lord has provided means by which the Church can correct every man within it, and can dismiss the unworthy from power. That right is resident in the Church of Christ; and the Church don’t (sic) have to wait till God kills off unworthy servants before a wrong can be righted.

[Verum]

Plural Marriage was thought to be covered by the I amendment to the Constitution. Even William A. Beatty, an outspoken opponent of the Principle, essentially conceded the point, although the Supreme Court characteristically disagreed.

All that is "against the law" is not necessarily "illegal" because we have had myriads of laws that were not legitimate on constitutional grounds, not to mention moral and logical grounds. It's illegal, for example, according to the Food and Drug Administration, to tell people that tart cherries are as good as aspirin for pain relief. (I'm not telling you that, please note, just reporting the legal issue involved.)

I conclude that engaging in Plural Marriage as a function of religious principles is not, nor ever was, legitimately illegal. For those who believe that any law is valid, the opinion may vary.

Lehi

So, we can still do it if its illegal, as long as we believe, or the church believes, that it should not be illegal? That's fine with me, but you can't say that as long as church leaders don't ask you do to anything illegal that you can trust them, because historically that have required things of its members that were illegal.

Have they asked members to do anything unethical or immoral?...thats a separate issue and is relative.

Edited March 14, 2012 by Verum

[Cobalt-70]

I've heard it said that we should be obedient to our leaders, and if those leaders ever lead us astray, it is on their heads and not ours.

A friend brought this quote to light:

""We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them -- even if they knew it was wrong. But such obedience as this is worse than folly to us. It is slavery in the extreme. The man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings until he turns from his folly. A man of God would despise this idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the Saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without any questions. When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves." -- Joseph Smith, Jr. in the Millennial Star, volume 14, number 38, pages 593-595."

On the other hand, Pres. Marion G. Romney said, in Fall 1960 General Conference, "Always keep your eye on the President of the church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, even if it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it...."

This statement is cited 64 times on the lds.org website. It is found in the Ensign (multiple times), in CES manuals, and in the Aaronic Priesthood manual.

[LeSellers]

So, we can still do it if its illegal, as long as we believe, or the church believes, that it should not be illegal?

Not quite.

As long as the question of the constitutionality of the law was in play, obeying an immoral law, like the anti-bigamy/polygamy laws, is not doing something illegal. 20/20 hindsight is not a good way of judging the past.

you can't say that as long as church leaders don't ask you do to anything illegal that you can trust them, because historically that have required things of its members that were illegal.

Not if the law in question is immoral or unconstitutional, as it was in the only case anyone has mentioned. There is no justification for such a law, since no one was hurt by it, all parties were consenting adults (for their time), and no one was forced to participate against his will. It was no less a matter of religious freeodm (and more so in my opinion) than the current brouhaha over whether the federal government has the legitimate power to require a religious organization to provide contraception and abortifacients as part of any health care package offered to its employees.

Have they asked members to do anything unethical or immoral?...thats a separate issue and is relative.

Your insinuation is that they have. I invite you to give us any reasonable reference to such a request.

Lehi

[CV75]

On the other hand, Pres. Marion G. Romney said, in Fall 1960 General Conference, "Always keep your eye on the President of the church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, even if it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it...."

This statement is cited 64 times on the lds.org website. It is found in the Ensign (multiple times), in CES manuals, and in the Aaronic Priesthood manual.

This is how I've seen it:

“I remember years ago when I was a bishop I had President [Heber J.] Grant talk to our ward. After the meeting, I drove him home. . . . When we got to his home I got out of the car and went up on the porch with him. Standing by me, he put his arm over my shoulder and said: ‘My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.’ Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said, ‘But you don’t need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.’” (Marion G. Romney, in Conference Report, Oct. 1960, p. 78.)

[Damien the Leper]

This is how I've seen it:

“I remember years ago when I was a bishop I had President [Heber J.] Grant talk to our ward. After the meeting, I drove him home. . . . When we got to his home I got out of the car and went up on the porch with him. Standing by me, he put his arm over my shoulder and said: ‘My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.’ Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said, ‘But you don’t need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.’” (Marion G. Romney, in Conference Report, Oct. 1960, p. 78.)

The mere fact that such a childishly audacious statement came into circulation is enough to make the thinking world vomit.

[LeSellers]

The mere fact that such a childishly audacious statement came into circulation is enough to make the thinking world vomit.

People who would vomit at this do not understand the power and burden of Priesthood keys.

Lehi

[Damien the Leper]

People who would vomit at this do not understand the power and burden of Priesthood keys.

Lehi

Doesn't matter. The statement is ignorant.

[LeSellers]

Doesn't matter. The statement is ignorant.

It matters a great deal.

The statement is a litmus test for faith. Not faith in the men God put in any position, but faith that God would put the right man in the right place at the right time to do the right thing.

Those who find such a statement ignorant do not understand the power and burden of Priesthood keys.

Lehi

[Sky]

The mere fact that such a childishly audacious statement came into circulation is enough to make the thinking world vomit.

The "thinking world" also, by and large, doesn't believe in prophets. Or if they do - only the long dead ones.

[CV75]

Doesn't matter. The statement is ignorant.

I don't see how one's vomiting at something he does not understand (yet peceives as ignorant) is not related to his ignorance.