jkwilliams Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 1 minute ago, rockpond said: Give me a break, Scott. CFR where the statement was disavowed to the body of the church. I don't think it ever was because the same idea continued to be taught. See my post above, for example.
rockpond Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 4 minutes ago, smac97 said: CFR. When was it taught? By whom? Where? This phrase appears zero times on the LDS.org website. If all you've got is anecdotal "I heard it from my bishop 15 years ago"-type "evidence," then say so. For the record, I have never heard this phrase or concept taught in the Church. Ever. The only people whom I have seen propagate it are critics, dissidents, and enemies of the Church. CFR #2. What "similar ideas?" Chapter and verse, please. Thanks, -Smac I've mentioned them at least twice now. Most notably and recently was the gen con repetition of Benson's 14 Fundamentals address. Here are details of the others I have mentioned: "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 but you don't need to worry. The lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray." -- Marion G. Romney, quoting Heber J. Grant "Conference Report" Oct. 1960 p. 78 "The Lord Almighty leads this Church, and he will never suffer you to be led astray if you are found doing your duty. You may go home and sleep as sweetly as a babe in its mother's arms, as to any danger of your leaders leading you astray, for if they should try to do so the Lord would quickly sweep them from the earth." -- Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 9, p. 289, 1862. "When the Prophet speaks the debate is over". -- N. Eldon Tanner, August Ensign 1979, pages 2-3 "I sat in this tabernacle some years ago as President Joseph Fielding Smith stood at this pulpit. It was the general priesthood meeting of April 1972, the last general conference before President Smith passed away. He said: 'There is one thing which we should have exceedingly clear in our minds. Neither the President of the Church, nor the First Presidency, or the united voice of the First Presidency and the Twelve will ever lead the Saints astray or send forth counsel to the world that is contrary to the mind and will of the lord'." -- L. Aldin Porter of the Presidency of the First Quorum of Seventies (Ensign, Nov. 1994, p. 63) "The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray." -- Pres. Wilford Woodruff 3
rockpond Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 3 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: As a general rule the LDS don't go around correcting every false idea put forth by its leaders. If she were taught that as a lifelong church member, it appears she hasn't read this. SEE http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine Yes, I would say there is a good chance that she hasn't read that particular post on Mormon Newsroom.
Scott Lloyd Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 10 minutes ago, rockpond said: I had already read it before TSS posted it. Which makes your behavior even less acceptable. 1
rockpond Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: Which makes your behavior even less acceptable. Try reading what I actually wrote, Scott. And kindly answer the CFR or retract. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 7 minutes ago, rockpond said: Give me a break, Scott. CFR where the statement was disavowed to the body of the church. I don't think it ever was because the same idea continued to be taught. That Mormons are expected to let the president of the Church do their thinking for them? That's a scurrilous falsehood.
Scott Lloyd Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) 2 minutes ago, rockpond said: Try reading what I actually wrote, Scott. And kindly answer the CFR or retract. What CFR? (This thread is moving to fast for me.) Edited to add: I do note that smac97 has a couple of CFRs on the table for you. Edited May 5, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
rockpond Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: That Mormons are expected to let the president of the Church do their thinking for them? That's a scurrilous falsehood. I said "similar". Please read what I write and not what you seem to want to see. And I've cited examples. Now, please answer the CFR. 2
rockpond Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: What CFR? (This thread is moving to fast for me.) Where the Prophet disavowed the 1945 Ward Teachers message to the body of the church (not just a private letter).
jkwilliams Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 Just now, Scott Lloyd said: That Mormons are expected to let the president of the Church do their thinking for them? That's a scurrilous falsehood. I thought it was the idea that, after the prophet speaks on a given issue, members are to follow His counsel, regardless of their personal feelings. If that's a scurrilous falsehood, it's one that has been taught for an awful long time. 3
Scott Lloyd Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 1 minute ago, jkwilliams said: I thought it was the idea that, after the prophet speaks on a given issue, members are to follow His counsel, regardless of their personal feelings. If that's a scurrilous falsehood, it's one that has been taught for an awful long time. That's not what the anti-Mormons and other critics claim. They claim the Church teaches that "when the prophet speaks, the thinking has been done," a notion that was disavowed by the president of the Church almost as soon as it was published all those many years ago.
Scott Lloyd Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) 6 minutes ago, rockpond said: Where the Prophet disavowed the 1945 Ward Teachers message to the body of the church (not just a private letter). You're requiring me to provide references for (or retract) a claim I didn't make? Howzabout your answering smac's two CFRs? Edited May 5, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
jkwilliams Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 Just now, Scott Lloyd said: That's not what the anti-Mormons and other critics claim. They claim the Church teaches that "when the prophet speaks, the thinking has been done," a notion that was disavowed by the president of the Church almost as soon as it was published all those many years ago. I don't see a significant functional difference between that disavowed notion and the idea that "when the prophet speaks, the debate is over." The bottom line here is that I have never heard anyone in the church say that, when members disagree with the prophet's counsel, they should ignore that counsel. But as I said, I don't know very many church members who believe in blind obedience.
Scott Lloyd Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 1 minute ago, jkwilliams said: I don't see a significant functional difference between that disavowed notion and the idea that "when the prophet speaks, the debate is over." That's your problem. 2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: The bottom line here is that I have never heard anyone in the church say that, when members disagree with the prophet's counsel, they should ignore that counsel. But as I said, I don't know very many church members who believe in blind obedience. Well if that's true, you and I don't really have a quarrel.
HappyJackWagon Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 41 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: It has been repeated by anti-Mormons and others -- including you just now -- without providing the crucial information that it was disavowed at the time by the Church president. That is inexcusable, rockpond. You should know better. Sigh. The statement appeared in a church magazine. The disavowal you are speaking of was in a private letter sent to a local clergyman questioning the idea. You claim it was disavowed immediately. CFR that there was a disavowal to the 1940's church magazine statement that when the prophet speaks the thinking is done. BTW- a disavowal would need to be public, not private for it to mean anything. 2
rockpond Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 5 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: You're requiring me to provide references for (or retract) a claim I didn't make? Howzabout your answering smac's two CFRs? You said that the prophet disavowed the "thinking has been done" statement from the 1945 Ward Teachers message. Private correspondence isn't a disavowal to the church. If you are claiming that the statement was disavowed to the church I'd like to see a reference for that. If you are claiming that it was disavowed to Dr. Cope, then I stand by my statement that Viegas-Haws point is correct. 2
jkwilliams Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: That's your problem. Well if that's true, you and I don't really have a quarrel. Perhaps you could explain the functional difference that I'm having a problem seeing. 1
thesometimesaint Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) I'm not a life time member. I joined when I was 20 years old. I'm now fast approaching 65 so I've been a member for most of my life, so far. I've never believed that any member of the Church was/is infallible. That I have to get my personal confirmation from God before I act against the wise counsel from the Church. That hasn't happened yet, so I think I'm on pretty solid ground.. Ps; Long time no see JK. Glad to see you here here. Edited May 5, 2016 by thesometimesaint
HappyJackWagon Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 31 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: I've certainly heard that repeated many times in my lifetime. Here's a similar statement from N. Eldon Tanner: https://www.lds.org/ensign/1979/08/the-debate-is-over?lang=eng So, no, you're not out in left field. I do think most church members recognize that blind, unthinking obedience is not in harmony with the gospel. Good to see you, John!
Jeanne Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: That's not what the anti-Mormons and other critics claim. They claim the Church teaches that "when the prophet speaks, the thinking has been done," a notion that was disavowed by the president of the Church almost as soon as it was published all those many years ago. When????? Gees..why didn't someone correct me time and time again??? Why didn't my seminary teacher let me know..I graduated from seminary in 1974..no internet..but heck, if in the 1940's this what taught and then disavowed, why didn't everyone in my ward and stake know anything about this?? Edited to add: My Dad used this phrase over and over again in talking gospel principles in the home. This is why so much of what I loved about JS was such a huge disappointment. Does the church realize yet that honesty could really pay off??? Edited May 5, 2016 by Jeanne 1
HappyJackWagon Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 17 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: What CFR? (This thread is moving to fast for me.) Edited to add: I do note that smac97 has a couple of CFRs on the table for you. SMACs CFR has been answered. You have not answered yours. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) 7 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: SMACs CFR has been answered. You have not answered yours. Where has his CFR been answered? And I repeat that I'm not obligated to answer a CFR for a claim I didn't make. Edited May 5, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
jkwilliams Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 6 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Good to see you, John! You too! I just saw the words "sad stereotypical surrender to cynicism" and it just sounded like something I'd enjoy. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 9 minutes ago, rockpond said: You said that the prophet disavowed the "thinking has been done" statement from the 1945 Ward Teachers message. Private correspondence isn't a disavowal to the church. If you are claiming that the statement was disavowed to the church I'd like to see a reference for that. If you are claiming that it was disavowed to Dr. Cope, then I stand by my statement that Viegas-Haws point is correct. Whether or not there was a published disavowal to the Church (there may or may not have been; I haven't researched it enough to know) is an issue separate and apart from the fact that the president of the Church did make that disavowal, that the disavowal has been widely published by now, and that it is irresponsible and reckless at best, dishonest at worst, to continue to repeat this statement without providing the essential information that it was disavowed by the Church president.
Jeanne Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Where has his CFR been answered. And I repeat that I'm not obligated to answer a CFR for a claim I didn't make. You are on the hot seat and don't know know what to do about it. 2
Recommended Posts