Sad, Stereotypical Surrender to Cynicism

[rockpond]

54 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And it was only in "an official Church publication" because as a matter of routine back then, a monthly message was printed and given to ward teachers to take to the homes they visited and leave it with them. For convenience, that message was published from month to month in the Improvement Era.

From the top of page 354 of the June 1945 Improvement Era:

"Ward Teaching CONDUCTED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE PRESIDING BISHOPRIC"

Directly underneath that header is the Ward Teachers article including the quote we've been discussing.

The title page (p. 322) of the same issue has, at the top:

The Improvement Era

"THE VOICE OF THE CHURCH"

Official organ of the Priesthood Quorums, Mutual Improvement Associations, Department of Education, Music Committee, Ward Teachers, and other Agencies of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Editors are identified as Heber J Grant, George A Smith, and John A Widstoe

https://archive.org/stream/improvementera4806unse#page/n3/mode/2up

 

Edited May 10, 2016 by rockpond
Corrected page number to 354. h/t bsjkki

[rockpond]

19 minutes ago, CV75 said:

But that is not what President Woodruff said. I think you need to educate yourself before misrepresenting them to build a false dichotomy. The explanation for your so-called dichotomy is very simple, really. Just read the quotes: https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-of-the-living-prophets-student-manual/chapter-2-the-living-prophet-the-president-of-the-church?lang=eng

Once you are properly educated, I'm sure you will see others and in a new light, and that will informs your flawed representations of the culture.

The exact quote:  "“The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray."

I'm familiar with our church's teachings.  I aced the Teachings of the Living Prophets class at BYU.   And I taught the D&C/Church History year of seminary.  If you think I lack education on something, feel free to explain why you feel it is a false dichotomy.  

[bsjkki]

25 minutes ago, rockpond said:

From the top of page 345 of the June 1945 Improvement Era:

"Ward Teaching CONDUCTED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE PRESIDING BISHOPRIC"

Directly underneath that header is the Ward Teachers article including the quote we've been discussing.

The title page (p. 322) of the same issue has, at the top:

The Improvement Era

"THE VOICE OF THE CHURCH"

Official organ of the Priesthood Quorums, Mutual Improvement Associations, Department of Education, Music Committee, Ward Teachers, and other Agencies of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Editors are identified as Heber J Grant, George A Smith, and John A Widstoe

https://archive.org/stream/improvementera4806unse#page/n3/mode/2up

 

It's page 354 not 345.  Thank you for the link.  It was interesting to read it in context.

[HappyJackWagon]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

I don't mean to be rude either, but I'll issue a CFR that "this idea" has been taught in Church talks and publications. Just one sample per decade sine 1945 will suffice. And by "this idea" I take you to mean that "when the prophet speaks, the thinking is done" and that the prophets are infallible.

Quote

Scott Lloyd said:

With all that body of content, surely you ought to be able to cite something that supports this allegedly pervasive idea in the Church that "when the prophet speaks the thinking has been done," if, indeed, it is as pervasive as you and others say it is.

We'll call this a CFR.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for not knowing this as you seem to claim. You and Scott are disputing this the most so I'll share...AGAIN...a few references for you to peruse. However, your call for a CFR from every decade is absurd. I've never claimed it's been every decade, however, everytime one of these early ideas is repeated it is like teaching the idea anew.

Lets start with this. It is well known. It is canonized in Official Declaration 1. It is repeated often in lessons and manuals.

“President Wilford Woodruff stated: I say to Israel, the Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of the Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God.” (The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, pp. 212–13.)

President Marion G. Romney: “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 … 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.’” (Conference Report, October 1960, p. 78.)

Brigham Young, “I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture.” (Journal of Discourses, 13:95.)

A couple of excerpts from Headquarter Functionaries published in the Improvement Era.

Ward Teachers’ Message for June, 1945

“Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes, whether actively or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the “prophets, seers, and revelators” of the Church is cultivating the spirit of apostasy.”

“This sort of game is Satan’s favorite pastime, and he has practiced it on believing souls since Adam. He wins a great victory when he can get members of the Church to speak against their leaders and to “do their own thinking.”

“When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan–it is God’s plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy. God works in no other way.”

Elaine Cannon- General YW Pres. “When the Prophet speaks, … the debate is over” (Ensign, Nov. 1978, p. 108).

N Eldon Tanner- 1st Counselor in 1st Presidency  https://www.lds.org/ensign/1979/08/the-debate-is-over?lang=eng 

“those who neglect their spiritual training or fail to heed the warning voice of the prophets will suffer a spiritual death.”

“True Latter-day Saints have no such dilemma. They know that the messages of the prophet have come from the Lord and have the concurrence of all the General Authorities, who are men of vision and integrity, and who themselves try to keep in tune with deity.”

“History and experience have proven that whenever and wherever there is departure from following the word of the Lord, calamity occurs. Civilizations have fallen; there has been general and individual destruction; there have been weeping and wailing and great sorrow; there have been famine and pestilence. Only Satan and his cohorts have been left to rejoice. He is the author of the debates on moral issues.”

“When the prophet speaks the debate is over.”

Ezra Taft Benson-  14 Fundamentals In Following the Prophet (Repeated in Lessons of Ezra Taft Benson Manual)

https://www.lds.org/liahona/1981/06/fourteen-fundamentals-in-following-the-prophet?lang=eng

“First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything…

There is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred.”

Then in section 21 verses 4–6 [D&C 21:4–6], the Lord states:

“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;

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

“For by doing these things the gates of hell shall not prevail against you.”

“Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.”

Fourteenth: The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the First Presidency—follow them and be blessed—reject them and suffer.”

 

CV75 & Scott Lloyd- These are merely the first references I found in 5 minutes of searching. As Scott mentioned, they can be found on LDS.org. I truly don't understand how anyone can dispute the idea that prophetic infallibility (doctrinal inerrancy), or that when the prophet speaks the debate is over and the thinking is done. This is not a rare idea stated by some functionary. This is pervasive as I've shown by multiple examples, covering multiple decades by multiple leaders.

 

[rockpond]

11 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

It's page 354 not 345.  Thank you for the link.  It was interesting to read it in context.

Thanks.  Corrected.

[rockpond]

2 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

This is not a rare idea stated by some functionary. This is pervasive as I've shown by multiple examples, covering multiple decades by multiple leaders.

And even the 1945 Ward Teachers message doesn't appear to simply be "some functionary".  The article was posted under the supervision of the Presiding Bishopric though I suppose it's possible that they didn't bother to review it since apparently the apostles charged with editing the magazine missed it as well.  I'll attribute that to their grief and the emotional (if not organizational) upheaval of having lost President Grant days earlier.

[consiglieri]

55 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Are they not right most of the time?

There right a lot more of the time than you are.

But thank you for providing another textbook example of the formulaic mindset I have identified here:

If Mormons disagree with me, one of the enlightened few, by holding with Church leaders most of the time, that means they have been taught to follow the Church leaders without thinking.

That, in case you haven't been following the discussion here, is an example of the fallacy of the false dilemma or false dichotomy.

 

Before you throw yourself a party, Scott, you have now said that Church leaders are right "most of the time."

Is this theoretical or reality-based?  That is my question.

In other words, have you ever identified a time when Church leaders were not correct; and by this I mean on a doctrinal issue?

If you can identify one such time, then I will concede that you do, in fact, believe that the thinking is not done when they speak.

If you cannot, I will have to conclude your position is not grounded in reality, but only in the area of conjecture.

Do you have any such example?

Thanks in advance! 

 

[CV75]

36 minutes ago, rockpond said:

The exact quote:  "“The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray."

I'm familiar with our church's teachings.  I aced the Teachings of the Living Prophets class at BYU.   And I taught the D&C/Church History year of seminary.  If you think I lack education on something, feel free to explain why you feel it is a false dichotomy.  

I'm sure you are eminently qualified in acing tests. And that you would also say you are highly educated (in a manner of speaking). Nevertheless... it would take an unreasonable amount of twisting to create a false dichotomy out the actual quote and the others included in the link I provided.

Does this mean you don't want to discuss the foolishness of statement #1 anymore, now that defending the individual who wrote it and miscalling the general Church culture haven't proven effective in defending your position that the statement is true?

[consiglieri]

 

54 minutes ago, CV75 said:

But when a fallible prophet, or even you, stands up and testifies that Jesus is the Christ, and testifies of the doctrine of Christ, that is an example of teaching inerrant doctrine. The ordinances performed are doctrinally inerrant. We can be inerrant on such doctrinal points. So there is no practical difference between being inerrant and being infallible. So the same discussion about infallibility holds. The Lord will not permit the living prophet to lead the Church astray, precisely because of that: His doctrine is inerrant.

So then we should put you in the category of prophets being infallible?

[consiglieri]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You're wrong about that. You should have looked at the link more closely and read the letter by President George Albert Smith to the leader of the First Unitarian Society in Salt Lake:

Does it strike you as odd that the First Unitarian Society should be better informed on the Church's position than the Latter-day Saints themselves? 

 

[CV75]

13 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I truly don't understand how anyone can dispute the idea that prophetic infallibility (doctrinal inerrancy), or that when the prophet speaks the debate is over and the thinking is done.

Simply put, the errors in statement #1 aren't what those quotes mean, and represent a convoluted understanding of what they really do mean.

Try to find some quotes that speak plainly to an injunction that the saints are to live by the infallibility and inerrancy of their leaders. You won't find them.

[CV75]

5 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

So then we should put you in the category of prophets being infallible?

I don't see how you got that from that!!!

But I am inerrant on at least one point so far: I chose to enter my second estate! But that doesn't set me apart from the rest of our fellow beings.

[HappyJackWagon]

22 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Simply put, the errors in statement #1 aren't what those quotes mean, and represent a convoluted understanding of what they really do mean.

Try to find some quotes that speak plainly to an injunction that the saints are to live by the infallibility and inerrancy of their leaders. You won't find them.

You agreed to what I identified as the idea. I supplied quotes that back up that idea. Now you're asking for direct quotes that specifically state "follow the prophet because he's infallible and inerrant"? Way to move the goal posts when you lose the argument.

The quotes show that over time the church has consistently taught that the prophet will not lead astray and therefore the thinking is done and the debate is over. This teaching has a great impact on church culture. It is clearly taught that Satan will lead you down to hell if you don't agree with everything the prophet says.

The prophet will never lead the church astray- Multiple teachings by multiple leaders

When the prophet speaks the debate is over- I demonstrated 2 separate direct quotes by different leaders

 

It's hard to understand why you won't accept the quotes and answer to the CFR you specifically asked for.

 

Edited May 10, 2016 by HappyJackWagon

[rockpond]

53 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I'm sure you are eminently qualified in acing tests. And that you would also say you are highly educated (in a manner of speaking). Nevertheless... it would take an unreasonable amount of twisting to create a false dichotomy out the actual quote and the others included in the link I provided.

Does this mean you don't want to discuss the foolishness of statement #1 anymore, now that defending the individual who wrote it and miscalling the general Church culture haven't proven effective in defending your position that the statement is true?

Sorry, I don't buy the "data dump" argument.  You gave a link with pages and pages of quotes and claimed that it contradicts what I've said.  Provide specifics or I'll assume you don't really have a case to make. 

I'm happy to still discuss Viegas-Haws statement #1.  What do you believe is false about it?

[consiglieri]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

You agreed to what I identified as the idea. I supplied quotes that back up that idea. Now you're asking for direct quotes that specifically state "follow the prophet because he's infallible and inerrant"? Way to move the goal posts when you lose the argument.

The quotes show that over time the church has consistently taught that the prophet will not lead astray and therefore the thinking is done and the debate is over. This teaching has a great impact on church culture. It is clearly taught that Satan will lead you down to hell if you don't agree with everything the prophet says.

The prophet will never lead the church astray- Multiple teachings by multiple leaders

When the prophet speaks the debate is over- I demonstrated 2 separate direct quotes by different leaders

 

It's hard to understand why you won't accept the quotes and answer to the CFR you specifically asked for.

 

While we are waiting for somebody to actually engage the issue and the evidence, let me share a story that happened in Sunday School a few years back to illustrate the point.

The teacher was presenting the hoary milk-strippings story from Church history.

I mentioned that this story struck me as problematic because it teaches that in a conflict between Church leaders and my wife, I should side with Church leaders.

The teacher said that we don't have to take everything Church leaders say just because they say it; we can pray to God about what they say to see if it is true.

"And what happens if I pray to God and he gives me a different answer?" I asked.

From the back of the class a sister shouted enthusiastically, "Keep on praying!"

I turned back to the teacher, folded my arms, and said, "I rest my case."

 

[bsjkki]

   I read through The Improvement Era link and found this on pg. 334.  This is from David O McKay's address at Heber J Grant's funeral.  Is this inerrant doctrine or merely his opinion?  How are we actually supposed to know what can change and what can't change?  

Edited May 10, 2016 by bsjkki
punctuation

[consiglieri]

4 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

   I read through The Improvement Era link and found this on pg. 334.  This is from David O McKay's address at Heber J Grant's funeral.  Is this inerrant doctrine or merely his opinion?  How are we actually supposed to know what can change and what can't change?  

O time! thou must untangle this, not I;
It is too hard a knot for me to untie.

[ALarson]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

So it did not "come from" the Church leaders, as you assert. It got by them inadvertently.

Wrong.  Check the source.

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/publications/when-the-prophet-speaks-is-the-thinking-done

It states above the message that it is:

Quote

CONDUCTED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE PRESIDING BISHOPRIC

You do consider "The Presiding Bishopric" to be church leaders, correct?

Edited May 10, 2016 by ALarson

[Analytics]

3 hours ago, rockpond said:

The exact quote:  "“The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray."

I'm familiar with our church's teachings.  I aced the Teachings of the Living Prophets class at BYU.   And I taught the D&C/Church History year of seminary.  If you think I lack education on something, feel free to explain why you feel it is a false dichotomy.  

Agreed.  The "thinking has been done" quote teaches the exact same principle as "The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray" quote.  I can't recall one way or the other whether I ever heard the former quote repeated during my time in Church, but the latter quote was recited over and over and over.  However, it is the exact same principle as the first quote.  When the Prophet has spoken, our job is to follow him--or role is to obey.  The first Law of Heaven is Obedience.  Even if the Prophet is wrong, we should follow him anyway--the Lord will bless us for following the Prophet--even if he is wrong.

It's bizarre to hear Mormons denying that the church has taught this.

 

[Tacenda]

1 minute ago, Analytics said:

Agreed.  The "thinking has been done" quote teaches the exact same principle as "The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray" quote.  I can't recall one way or the other whether I ever heard the former quote repeated during my time in Church, but the latter quote was recited over and over and over.  However, it is the exact same principle as the first quote.  When the Prophet has spoken, our job is to follow him--or role is to obey.  The first Law of Heaven is Obedience.  Even if the Prophet is wrong, we should follow him anyway--the Lord will bless us for following the Prophet--even if he is wrong.

It's bizarre to hear Mormons denying that the church has taught this.

 

Definitely agree, and the obedience thing too!

[consiglieri]

9 minutes ago, Analytics said:

 

It's bizarre to hear Mormons denying that the church has taught this.

 

It is bizarre.

But the reason some Mormons on this board are denying it seems to be because they realize it is an indefensible position.

Kind of like the world-wide flood.

It is an indefensible position.  Therefore the prophets never taught it.

That kind of thing.

[bsjkki]

14 minutes ago, Analytics said:

Agreed.  The "thinking has been done" quote teaches the exact same principle as "The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray" quote.  I can't recall one way or the other whether I ever heard the former quote repeated during my time in Church, but the latter quote was recited over and over and over.  However, it is the exact same principle as the first quote.  When the Prophet has spoken, our job is to follow him--or role is to obey.  The first Law of Heaven is Obedience.  Even if the Prophet is wrong, we should follow him anyway--the Lord will bless us for following the Prophet--even if he is wrong.

It's bizarre to hear Mormons denying that the church has taught this.

 

It is bizarre because this is taught not just about the prophet or the apostles but it translates all the way down the line.  Try having a disagreement with your Stake President or Bishop, you will be told you need obey them because you sustained them and that they are your leaders etc...My husband got immense pressure from his AP and Zone leaders to extend his mission.  He prayed about it and refused and they treated him like he was less committed and unfaithful.  They used many coercive techniques to try and influence him to extend because everyone in his group had agreed to stay but him.  His satisfaction when the request was denied by Salt Lake was immeasurable.

[ALarson]

1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

   I read through The Improvement Era link and found this on pg. 334.  This is from David O McKay's address at Heber J Grant's funeral.  Is this inerrant doctrine or merely his opinion?  How are we actually supposed to know what can change and what can't change?  

Wow.  Is there a copy of this address posted somewhere else?  It would be interesting to read through it. (I'll search too)

[bsjkki]

33 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Wow.  Is there a copy of this address posted somewhere else?  It would be interesting to read through it. (I'll search too)

Direct link to the entire address.  I could not find it anywhere else.

https://archive.org/stream/improvementera4806unse#page/n15/mode/2up

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, rockpond said:

From the top of page 354 of the June 1945 Improvement Era:

"Ward Teaching CONDUCTED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE PRESIDING BISHOPRIC"

Directly underneath that header is the Ward Teachers article including the quote we've been discussing.

The title page (p. 322) of the same issue has, at the top:

The Improvement Era

"THE VOICE OF THE CHURCH"

Official organ of the Priesthood Quorums, Mutual Improvement Associations, Department of Education, Music Committee, Ward Teachers, and other Agencies of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Editors are identified as Heber J Grant, George A Smith, and John A Widstoe

https://archive.org/stream/improvementera4806unse#page/n3/mode/2up

 

Whatever boilerplate might have appeared in the magazine back then, we have the president of the Church affirming to the head of the Unitarian Society in Salt Lake that the errant wording in the message did not originate Church leaders but, rather, got by them.

Whatever might be your disposition, I have no reason to believe President George Albert Smith was lying.

 

Edited May 11, 2016 by Scott Lloyd