Scott Lloyd Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 How horribly awful to thnk an international church, and one that proudly proclaims that fact, have a leadership that may reflect that slightly more than it does now.Ark steadying indeed.I've said I would be as happy as anyone with a more internationally flavored Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. But that is not the most important consideration or even among the most important. To borrow the phrasing of a famous historical figure, I tend to evaluate a leader not on the color of his skin but on the content of his character. So who is it who is applying the racial/ethnic/national litmus test, you or I?
Scott Lloyd Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) Are you saying that "progressive" types have a hard time relating to conservative Church members?On that note, I wonder if the fringers are secretly if not openly hoping for a latent gay rights advocate to be called so that he will be in place 40 years hence, when it is predicted that the old guard will have died off sufficiently for the Young Turks to swoop in and have the Church embrace homosexual behavior and begin to perform temple sealings for gay "marriages" and what not. In order to meet that 40-year timetable, it has to start happening about now. By the way, the timer countdown on that 40-year prediction now stands at 39 years, 8 months, 1 week, 1 day, 10 hours, 29 minutes and 9 seconds. Edited June 2, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 I agree with you, but sometimes members seem to need or desire to have a GA whom they feel represents them. I have not asked my German LDS friends, but I wouldn't be surprised if they take a certain amount of comfort in President Uchtdorf. President Uchtdorf is not German by birth. Just sayin'.
Scott Lloyd Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 Joseph Smith was called at the age of a teacher. Samuel was called as a prophet at age 13.You do realize the age delineation are artificial in the sense that the Lord can do whatever He pleases, right? Nothing is set in stone.Not as a Church president or as a holder of priesthood authority and keys. That would come later.
Scott Lloyd Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) If there's a language barrier and you come from a completely different culture, it becomes more complicated. Especially if you've only met someone a few times. I'd say President Uchtdorf is better at speaking and writing English than are many people who declare English as their mother tongue -- if attention to proper grammar, usage and mechanics and command of vocabulary are taken into account. Edited June 2, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
mfbukowski Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) Not explicitly, no. In fact, I don't think there should be any explicit "criteria" other than that outlined in the New Testament. I think that the Bretheren will take the necessary time in prayer and consultation to call the man who should be called. But a part of that process -- I believe -- will involve consideration of of *many* factors. I'm sure many things may cross their minds, but I wouldn't expect anything less than a spiritual confirmation as the ultimate deciding factor. Having said that, I don't think this would be an unreasonable question to consider: "Would a native Spanish-speaking Apostle aid the Church in better accomplishing its mission among a large portion of the Saints?"Well I agree as well, good point. Living in LA is interesting. Our stake recently merged with a Spanish stake into one giant wonderful glom of Saints. Kids were going to school and sitting next to LDS kids in class, not realizing that they also were active LDS because they belonged to another stake based on the language their parents spoke at home. All the kids spoke English perfectly, because they were in school. At night they would go home to their respective languages, including of course Samoan, Tagalog, Chinese, etc etc. So now each building houses two units, one Spanish, one English. One of the units starts with Relief Society/Priesthood, the other starts with Sacrament meeting. The starting times are integrated and staggered to make this all work with one chapel shared by both wards. These two "bookend" meetings- RS and Sacrament- are held in each ward's native language except the youth meetings portion, which are held in English, and integrated In fact all youth meetings are held in English and integrated. Those form the "middle section" of the bookend meetings. So YW and YM from both wards meet as one unit. Primary meets as one unit, which is a challenge for the pre-schoolers, but at least those who do not speak English receive some exposure before school starts. And each unit has Gospel doctrine for adults in their native languages. It works pretty well. And of course the reality is that probably 80% of the adults speak English, they just prefer to attend church, and pray etc in their own languages, which is totally understandable. But now at the Stake level, we have some of the very problems you raise here. "Should" the Stake president be bi-lingual? "Should" every member of the High Council be bi-lingual? Stake Relief Society president? Primary? YW? Every other auxiliary? How does one create a unified church culture in a worldwide church so that we are all "fellow saints" and handle these questions?? Should all the Apostles be bi-lingual? (And which languages are "preferred"?) There are no easy answers!! Edited June 2, 2015 by mfbukowski
Gray Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) I'd say President Uchtdorf is better at speaking and writing English than are many people who declare English as their mother tongue -- if attention to proper grammar, usage and mechanics and command of vocabulary are taken into account. I agree. He's an excellent speaker in more ways than one Edited June 2, 2015 by Gray
mfbukowski Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 I'd say President Uchtdorf is better at speaking and writing English than are many people who declare English as their mother tongue -- if attention to proper grammar, usage and mechanics and command of vocabulary are taken into account.Whatchoo sayin? That a dang furriner talks better than us good old Amurricans? 1
cinepro Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 For that part God could call a deacon p the apostleship if He wanted to. Well, I don't know about God, but Brigham Young sure could...
Scott Lloyd Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 Is Kim Clark next? (Sorry; couldn't resist!) Except that he was just called to the Seventy. So he's a past university president and a current member of the Seventy. Makes him a likely choice, I'd say, considering past patterns. You saw it here first, folks.
JLHPROF Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) So he's a past university president and a current member of the Seventy. Makes him a likely choice, I'd say, considering past patterns. You saw it here first, folks. But is he related to at least 3 previous general authorities either himself or through marriage?You need the trifecta - Church position, Church leadership experience, related to Church leadership. Edited June 2, 2015 by JLHPROF 3
mfbukowski Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 There is another factor. i suspect that the reason that so many General Authorities come from Utah-Idaho is that people with leadership experiencecombined with being a seasoned member of the church are a dime a dozen in the area. Until about the end of the Second World War we were not really building up the church elsewhere so much as telling people to come to the USA. With the church growing in many areas and without a lot of history leadership is scarce. We call senior couples on missions just to help train local leadership. Those who have the skills needed are scarce and calling a Seventy or Apostle there could mean lacking a good bishop or Stake President. God can call whom he wants but from a logistical standpoint it makes sense to grab people where there is a surplus instead of scarcity.This is also why I expect the demographics of church leadership to start changing soon. It has been about 70 years since the emphasis on gathering shifted and many of the foreign stakes are becoming stronger and more self-sufficient in leadership.An excellent point. And if that policy had not changed what would be the demographics of Utah today? First of all it would be one of the most populated and cosmopolitan places on earth, rivaling New York and Los Angeles, virtually all Mormon, and we would not be having this discussion. Would that be "good"? I think not. People need to remain in their native lands to spread the gospel worldwide. But church leadership is as much a skill as it is a spiritual journey and experienced leaders are essential, or the church ceases to be a unified church. 2
mfbukowski Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 I don't think that people in the Mormon Corridor realize that virtually any returned missionary who comes home fired up and remains active could be an Elder's Quorum president here in the "mission field" in about five minutes flat. Married with kids? A shoe-in. You have more that two or three of those in the same ward? That is called "deep leadership". Now you have an EQ president, you have YM and YW and primary covered by the wives. Find a mature sister for RS and you have a ward. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) I don't think that people in the Mormon Corridor realize that virtually any returned missionary who comes home fired up and remains active could be an Elder's Quorum president here in the "mission field" in about five minutes flat. Married with kids? A shoe-in. You have more that two or three of those in the same ward? That is called "deep leadership". Now you have an EQ president, you have YM and YW and primary covered by the wives. Find a mature sister for RS and you have a ward.So is that why I've never been in a bishopric or stake presidency or on a high council: we have a glut of leadership material here? As good an excuse as any, I suppose. No matter. I'm enjoying being ward choir director too much to want to do anything else just now. Edited June 2, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
VideoGameJunkie Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 I can't wait to see who it is. I hope it's someone young.
Nevo Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 I can't wait to see who it is. I hope it's someone young. I hope it's someone that can give thoughtful, interesting talks, or at least read a teleprompter fairly fluidly. 3
The Nehor Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 Harry Reid for Apostle! I have no idea if he would be good at it but the awkward silence after the announcement will be incredibly amusing. 4
The Nehor Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 I hope it's someone that can give thoughtful, interesting talks, or at least read a teleprompter fairly fluidly.Thanks for your endorsement but I do not want the position. 2
mfbukowski Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 So is that why I've never been in a bishopric or stake presidency or on a high council: we have a glut of leadership material here? As good an excuse as any, I suppose. No matter. I'm enjoying being ward choir director too much to want to do anything else just now.That could well be the reason that many might have that question.
Rivers Posted June 2, 2015 Author Posted June 2, 2015 I can't wait to see who it is. I hope it's someone young.Like you.
Russell C McGregor Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 How horribly awful to thnk an international church, and one that proudly proclaims that fact, have a leadership that may reflect that slightly more than it does now.Ark steadying indeed.Straw man.As you perfectly well know, nobody is suggesting that it would be a bad thing to have a non-American, or non-white apostle.Nobody. 3
Tacenda Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) That could well be the reason that many might have that question.It's kind of like going to a small high school where you can be on any sports team. Not the case in a large school, where your lucky to get on any team, just be in clubs. Ok, maybe that was a bad analogy. Edited June 2, 2015 by Tacenda 1
sethpayne Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 So is that why I've never been in a bishopric or stake presidency or on a high council: we have a glut of leadership material here? As good an excuse as any, I suppose. No matter. I'm enjoying being ward choir director too much to want to do anything else just now.I think if you lived where I do you would absolutely be in a SP or HC.
Recommended Posts