Sister Mcconkie's Address: Sustaining The Prophet

[Senator]

The fact that a 19th century quote is not reiterated in a current general conference does not mean it is not true or that its emphasis was not applicable in the time, place and setting in which it was delivered.

 

But in the current day and age, there may be other aspects of true and doctrine that need to be emphasized more than what is expressed in the 19th century quote.

 

Again, if everything were emphasized at every general conference (assuming that were even possible) then nothing would be emphasized.

 

What would you say the difference in emphasis is in the current teaching that is more applicable today than at another time? Relative to the subject at hand of course.

[Deborah]

In other words we need to pay heed more to the living prophets than those in the past. We abide by the wisdom they gave but we need to follow the living instructions. BY also wanted everyone to gather in Utah to build up the struggling church. Today we gather in individual stakes around the world because of the growth of the church. I have been amazed at the strength and testmonies of those in foreign lands who I think sometimes understand the gospel better than we do in a prosperous nation.

[Deborah]

I also think given the emotion in many of the speakers and the great emphasis on following the prophet that they were preparing us for something to come. I personally believe when the final temples are completed that have already been announced and people have a chance to obtain their endowments that we will see some major events in the world, ones that will make major changes in our lives.

Edited October 5, 2014 by Deborah

[Senator]

I also think given the emotion in many of the speakers and the great emphasis on following the prophet that they were preparing us for something to come. I personally believe when the final temples are completed that have already been announced and people have a chance to obtain their endowments that we will see some major events in the world, ones that will make major changes in our lives.

 

Are you acting in line with your name-sake?

Edited October 5, 2014 by Senator

[Scott Lloyd]

What would you say the difference in emphasis is in the current teaching that is more applicable today than at another time? Relative to the subject at hand of course.

I can only guess, but given the tenor of the times, where all too many are being way too dismissive of inspired counsel that comes through living prophets, the greater need today is for admonition in that regard. President Brigham Young's "fear" as expressed in the quote you gave from him might not be as big a cause for concern just now as it was when he made that statement.

Edited October 5, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Senator]

I can only guess, but given the tenor of the times, where all too many are being way too dismissive of inspired counsel that comes through living prophets, the greater need today is for admonition in that regard. President Brigham Young's "fear" as expressed in the quote you gave from him might not be as big a cause for concern today as it was when he was alive.

Ok

[DBMormon]

I think we are missing this fact that pres uchtdorf reiterated the Brigham Young quote in a recent ces fireside hence still holding it up as still valid and of worth

Edited October 5, 2014 by DBMormon

[The Nehor]

What would you say the difference in emphasis is in the current teaching that is more applicable today than at another time? Relative to the subject at hand of course.

The question is which side of the horse are more people falling off of. I think we have more of a problem with people choosing not to follow the prophet then we do with people shifting all their spiritual responsibilities onto the prophet.

Edited October 5, 2014 by The Nehor

[bluebell]

I admit that my attention to the addresses was not entirely undevided. Hence my following question. In addition to the numerous admonitions to "Follow the Prophet", was there equal if not suffient councel such as below?

“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. 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. "

Please take this as an honest question, with no intention to debate.

I do remember one speaker who said that God does not want us to simply sit back and follow the prophet because the prophet says to do something, but that we must have a testimony that the prophet is telling us to do it because it is God's will (paraphrasing).

But I don't remember which speaker. I think it was Eyring but I'm not sure.

[Senator]

I do remember one speaker who said that God does not want us to simply sit back and follow the prophet because the prophet says to do something, but that we must have a testimony that the prophet is telling us to do it because it is God's will (paraphrasing).

But I don't remember which speaker. I think it was Eyring but I'm not sure.

Great

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Have to say, I didn't care for this talk.  It borderlined on deification of the living prophet as opposed to his role in teaching the Lord's will.

 

Maybe I'm just being picky, but after all the strides made last conference, especially by Pres. Uchtdorf, I really don't think another prophetic infallibility talk is beneficial.

Eyring and Nelson's talks were the same as Sis. McConkie's.

I appreciate Elder Hales for reigning in the rhetoric and and putting the focus back on Yahshua.

[Scott Lloyd]

Eyring and Nelson's talks were the same as Sis. McConkie's.

I appreciate Elder Hales for reigning in the rhetoric and and putting the focus back on Yahshua.

I don't get the impression he "reigned in" anything.

 

And Sister McConkie certainly didn't de-emphasize Christ. As I mentioned earlier she spoke of the Church being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets with Christ himself being the chief cornerstone.

 

It is all one structure; one element cannot be separated from the others.

 

Edited to add:

 

For example, Elder Ballard, who is speaking now, said:

 

We need to experience a continuing conversion by increasing our faith in Jesus Christ and our faithfulness to His gospel throughout our lives—not just once, but regularly. Alma asked, “And now behold, I say unto you, my brethren [and sisters], if ye have experienced a change of heart, and if ye have felt to sing the song of redeeming love, I would ask, can ye feel so now?”

 

 

Immediately thereafter, he said:

 

The experienced river guides today can be likened to the Church’s Apostles and Prophets and inspired local priesthood and auxiliary leaders. They help us arrive safely to our final destination.

Recently, I spoke at the new mission presidents’ seminar and counseled these leaders, “Keep the eyes of the mission on the leaders of the Church. We will not and cannot lead you astray.

“And as you teach your missionaries to focus their eyes on us, teach them to never follow those who think they know more about how to administer the affairs of the Church than Heavenly Father and the Lord Jesus Christ do through the priesthood leaders who have the keys to preside.

“I have discovered in my ministry that those who have become lost and confused are typically those who have most often . . . forgotten that when the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve speak with a united voice, it is the voice of the Lord for that time. The Lord reminds us, ‘Whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.’” In other words, they leave the Old Ship Zion—they fall away, they apostatize. Tragically, they often experience short-term and eventually long-term unintended consequences, not only for themselves but also for their families.

Our local Church leaders, like seasoned river guides, have been tutored by life’s experiences; have been trained and mentored by Apostles and Prophets and other officers of the Church; and, most importantly, have been tutored by the Lord Himself.

 

Edited October 6, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Teancum]

Have to say, I didn't care for this talk.  It borderlined on deification of the living prophet as opposed to his role in teaching the Lord's will.

 

Maybe I'm just being picky, but after all the strides made last conference, especially by Pres. Uchtdorf, I really don't think another prophetic infallibility talk is beneficial.

Well for once you and I agree. Just an awful talk. Follow the prophet no matter what he says is broder line cult like thinking.

[Teancum]

I also think given the emotion in many of the speakers and the great emphasis on following the prophet that they were preparing us for something to come. I personally believe when the final temples are completed that have already been announced and people have a chance to obtain their endowments that we will see some major events in the world, ones that will make major changes in our lives.

So follow today's prophet even if they condridict prior prophets.

[teddyaware]

Well for once you and I agree. Just an awful talk. Follow the prophet no matter what he says is broder line cult like thinking.

This is an example of precisely the kind of thinking that those who just spoke to us in General Conference warned us not to heed. It's up to each one of us who professes to be a Latter-day Saint to prayerfully use his or her own free agency to decided for themselves which of these two Gospel approachs will bring them safely home.

Edited October 5, 2014 by teddyaware

[VideoGameJunkie]

Stay in the boat people.

[Bernard Gui]

The citations will of course appear in the published version.  The Scriptural quotes and allusions came so thick and fast in her address that I was almost transfixed at the fluency of it, and of her ardent and articulate delivery -- very much in the McConkie tradition.  I have only met one other Mormon woman capable of that, a long time ago, and far away.

Sister Gui and my son Esperanzo both commented on the effectiveness and polish of her delivery and message, in his words, "It lacked the syrup we often hear." I'm sure some will make a fuss about the purple.

Edited October 5, 2014 by Bernard Gui

[Garden Girl]

Sister Gui and my son Esperanzo both commented on the effectiveness and polish of her delivery and message, in his words, "It lacked the syrup we often hear." I'm sure some will make a fuss about the purple.

 

I appreciated her lack of the much maligned "primary voice."  Her message I agree was effective and timely...

 

GG

[Scott Lloyd]

So follow today's prophet even if they condridict prior prophets.

I don't know what condridict means, but we have a similar word, in English, contradict.

 

And it makes a great deal of difference in either instance, whether the prophet is speaking as a prophet.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

I don't know what condridict means, but we have a similar word, in English, contradict.

 

And it makes a great deal of difference in either instance, whether the prophet is speaking as a prophet.

Is that really necessary?

[Damien the Leper]

Sister McConkie of the Young Women presidency is speaking now.

 

Interesting in today's context that she would choose to speak on sustaining the prophet as the only man authorized to make any changes in doctrine and on the Church being built upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets with Christ himself being the chief cornerstone.

 

Go Sister McConkie!

Don Bradley addressed the issues of this talk on Facebook and made a compelling case. I'll see if I can find and post it.

[Damien the Leper]

From Don Bradley:

"Whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same" - Hearing this scriptural passage today in Conference, via Sister McConkie, invites us to study it further. It's sometimes the scriptures we hear the most that we dig into the least. Because we're sure we already understand them, we don't study their details or their contexts.

When we interpret this scriptural phrase without connecting it to the larger revelation of which it is part it can sound like: 'Anything said by any of God's servants is identically true, authoritative, and infallible as if God said it,' an interpretation that would make every view, aphorism, or story related publicly by one of God's servants as weighty as God's words to Joseph Smith in the Sacred Grove or Jesus' Sermon on the Mount. But Latter-day Saints have formally repudiated that view from the beginning. The prophets who wrote our foundational scripture, the Book of Mormon, spoke of their "mistakes of men" within its pages. Our founding prophet Joseph Smith said "a prophet is only a prophet when acting as such." And we have always rejected the infallibility of leaders as a false doctrine that sneaked into Christendom during the great apostasy.

But if this passage doesn't mean that God's servants' words are equal to God's words, what _does_ it mean?

Here it is in context: "Search these commandments, for they are true and faithful, and the prophecies and promises which are in them shall all be fulfilled.What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same" (D&C 1:37-38).

In short: All God's promises and prophecies, whether we have heard them by His voice speaking to us or read them in the prophecies He gave through His prophets, will be fulfilled.

This revelation was given to serve as the Lord's preface to Joseph Smith's collected revelations, originally published under the title The Book of Commandments. In the early days of the church the revelations weren't called "revelations" or "sections"; they were called "commandments," as in this title. So when this revelatory preface says, "Search these commandments...the prophecies and promises which are in them shall all be fulfilled," it means _the revelations_ we now have as the Doctrine and Covenants.

It's in _that_ context that this revelation says "What I the Lord have spoken I have spoken...; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether [i have spoken them] by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same."

The revelation _doesn't_ say that the words of Joseph Smith, or any other prophet, are equivalent to God's words. It says that _God's words_ are true no matter whether given to us directly or--like "these commandments": the revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants--given to us through a prophet. To state it differently: in context this scripture doesn't say that the prophet's words are essentially God's words--something Latter-day Saints have denied since the Book of Mormon was published and Joseph Smith admitted to not always speaking as a prophet; it says that _when prophets DO give revelations, those revelations are as true as if God spoke them to us personally_. Revelation, however given, is revelation.

And, so far from saying that everything God's prophetic servants say is as perfect as if God spoke it, D&C 1 says that even the revelations to Joseph Smith are limited by his human imperfection and language, and that they were given to correct him and the other founding saints when they erred and sinned. A little before it says "whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants," it explains:

24 Behold, I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding.

25 And inasmuch as they erred it might be made known;

26 And inasmuch as they sought wisdom they might be instructed;

27 And inasmuch as they sinned they might be chastened, that they might repent;

28 And inasmuch as they were humble they might be made strong, and blessed from on high, and receive knowledge from time to time.

Teachers and speakers are never going to, or be able to, always give the whole context in which each passage of scripture they cite should be understood (although more of this would almost always be better). So they will often necessarily need us to know the fuller context needed for correct interpretation ourselves.

And that is surely the case with the familiar phrase "by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same." Because it is so commonly quoted in isolation from its interpretive context, it will usually be up to us to provide the larger background for ourselves, and sometimes to share it others involved in the discussion.

[Paddy]

It was a pretty standard talk on our modern day interpretation and expectation of prophets. There was nothing radical in it and kept with the current rhetoric. If there is any criticism of the talk it would be that it was a very focused, do I dare say narrow, explanation. There was no nuance in the talk so to criticise her for not focusing on the saviours role or other related concepts is a bit unfair to her. There is not enough time in a 10 minute talk to draw out different concepts.

[Scott Lloyd]

Valentinus: Don Bradley addressed the issues of this talk on Facebook and made a compelling case. I'll see if I can find and post it.

 

What Don said in your quoted passage is true and insightful.

 

However, it seems to address only one point pertaining to Sister McConkie's talk, that being how one specific passage of scripture she used ought to be interpreted and applied.

 

And I don't see that his comments are in any way incompatible with her message.

Edited October 6, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[CV75]

Sister McConkie of the Young Women presidency is speaking now.

 

Interesting in today's context that she would choose to speak on sustaining the prophet as the only man authorized to make any changes in doctrine and on the Church being built upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets with Christ himself being the chief cornerstone.

 

Go Sister McConkie!

I thought it was interesting that it (immediately?) followed Elder Nelson's talk about how the First Presidency and Twelve operate, and what they do.