Scott Lloyd Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Calm said: They didn't have the same info under the five apostles I checked though. I just checked a few apostle bios myself. Apparently, for some reason, they don’t do it for members of the Twelve. They don’t make a secret of it though. Back when President Nelson was chairman of the Missionary Executive Council, I wrote stories quoting him in which I noted that he had that assignment. Nobody ever censored me. Edited January 23, 2018 by Scott Lloyd 1
Calm Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) Do you know how often they rotate them? It could be as simple as not wanting to keep an eye on the bios, making sure they are up to date since people already know what they do in general while have little to no knowledge about those in other callings so they feel obligated to include them there. May also prefer not having it out there so random people don't call them rather than the Directors. Edited January 23, 2018 by Calm
Hamba Tuhan Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Nobody ever censored me. Well, we do believe our leaders make mistakes... 2
Scott Lloyd Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 5 minutes ago, Calm said: Do you know how often they rotate them? It could be as simple as not wanting to keep an eye on the bios, making sure they are up to date since people already know what they do in general while have little to no knowledge about those in other callings so they feel obligated to include them there. May also prefer not having it out there so random people don't call them rather than the Directors. Could be.
Popular Post The Nehor Posted January 23, 2018 Popular Post Posted January 23, 2018 3 hours ago, hope_for_things said: Really? Seems like people taking an interest in the church dynamics would be viewed as a positive thing and evidence of vitality. I think vitality would be better demonstrated through doing Home Teaching, studying the scriptures, and serving in the church, family, and community. Nitpickey worrying about a General Authority shifting position is an incredibly lazy form of vitality I think we could do without. 8
The Nehor Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 2 hours ago, hope_for_things said: Wow, more negative comments and assumptions about me personally, anyone else want to pile on? 2
Popular Post Rain Posted January 23, 2018 Popular Post Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) 12 hours ago, hope_for_things said: I don't get why people are sensitive to those that believe it was a demotion, or why you consider this a criticism of the church. I think its just politics, and power dynamics and its present in every organization, and human nature. Is it always fair, no, but its just the way the world goes round and we have examples of it throughout the history of the world and throughout the history of the LDS church. The church teaches that no calling is more important, though HTing and VTing may be an exception to the idea. Why people are sensitive - because the church teaches that no callings are more important than others, then the idea that someone is upset about a "demotion" is like saying someone thinks they are too good to be in a lower calling or that they are arrogant, full of themselves, care more for worldly power than the humble and meek character traits of the Savior. There are so many dynamics with people being sensitive over this. First you have people defending a loved one over an accusation they feel doesn't apply to the loved one. Imagine people all over the Internet saying your dad was mean, but you always knew him to be kind. Then you have people that have never had leadership callings. Some of them can be at peace knowing that is ok, because they have always been taught that it doesn't matter what the calling is. It only matters that they magnify the calling. Now though they are not ok, because they will never be worthy in God's eyes. If going back to the 12 is a demotion then the people feel lied to. Don't we have enough people who feel that way? Do we really want to add more people? Edited January 23, 2018 by Rain 6
Robert F. Smith Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 11 hours ago, hope_for_things said: If this is public knowledge and anyone knows where we could find this information, could you please post a link. I'm unaware of how to find what committee assignments are out there for the quorum members, and I've done a few google searches without any success. It wouldn't be difficult for the church to list the assignments of its highest leaders, and many organizations show this information online for public consumption. Another dig at the end with the "I assume you realize" condescension. Really, this is getting tiresome. It is tiresome that you would make the automatic assumption that committee assignments are secret based on your own incompetence in use of the internet, and on the automatic assumption that I and others need to do your research work for you. As I already told you, I have never bothered to look any of that up, and see no reason to do so. Serious researchers and historians (such as Mike Quinn, for example) have no problem discovering such matters, and I would suggest that you turn to such sources if you want to understand the corporate functions of the Brethren. Stop playing the blame game, and deal with such issues in an adult, scholarly manner.
Robert F. Smith Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 11 hours ago, hope_for_things said: Right, because having good etiquette and treating others with respectful dialogue is clearly a tactic of the evil Dehlin and his ilk. You crave smooth acceptance of everything you whine about, and you will certainly find it with Mr Rogers. No need for rational dialogue. No jarring reality therapy from anyone, and certainly no red minuses on a college composition, because that might be upsetting. And we can't have that, can we? We'd rather be told what we want to hear, without any negative consequences. Tra-la-la.
Bobbieaware Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) 8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Nobody has the time or opportunity to become well informed on everything. Thus, we each of us are clueless on a virtually infinite number of subjects. No shame in that — unless the clueless one fails or refuses to recognize his cluelessness. I. get your point and respect it, but I very much doubt on this specific topic, the recent change in the quorum of the First Presidency, that an obviously intelligent lifelong member of the Church isn’t fully aware of the fact that the use of the word ‘demotion’ is going to be viewed by faithful members of the Church as a provocation and a deliberately intended insult to the new Church President and President Uchtdorf. Every knowledgeable member of the Church knows we’ve been taught for generations that it’s not where we serve but how we serve. But even if one wants to look at this recent event from the point of view of carnal human competitiveness, it’s hard to imagine that a prophet, seer and revelator of Jesus Christ, who’s just been advanced in seniority one step closer to eventually becoming the senior apostle, has somehow been demoted and humiliated. Factor in a long history of disrespect toward the leaders of the Church and the viability of the cluelessness excuse becomes even more remote. Edited January 23, 2018 by Bobbieaware
Kenngo1969 Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) 21 hours ago, rongo said: Chair (read: head) of missionary and correlations councils both sound very weighty and influential alone. But both of them? Remind me again about how he was supposed to have been demoted? Like I said, I love President Uchtdorf (I refuse to acknowledge his demotion) and I simply don't understand why he couldn't fulfill all three of those assignments and be in the First Presidency! [Sniff-sniff!] Edited January 23, 2018 by Kenngo1969
hope_for_things Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 10 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: For example, if you Google Bradley D. Foster, the first hit takes you here https://www.lds.org/church/leader/bradley-d-foster?lang=eng where you learn that Elder Foster is the executive director of the Family History Department. If you go here https://www.lds.org/church/leader/brent-h-nielson?lang=eng you learn that Elder Brent H. Nielsen is executive director of the Missionary Department. When you go here https://www.lds.org/church/leader/larry-y-wilson?lang=eng you learn that Elder Larry Y. Wilson is the executive director of the Temple Department. Ok, this is good, but I was speaking specifically about the assignments of members of the quorum of the twelve. I've looked at a few of them now and found nothing about current committee assignments, only their past history prior to their call as an apostle. 1
hope_for_things Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 10 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: Call me crazy (you wouldn't be the first ) but "taking an interest in ... church dynamics" is one thing; the uproar among purportedly-faithful members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints over such things as Elder Uchtdorf's reassignment (in an organization, the members of which are supposed to believe God Himself helms) is quite another. I don't see any substantive difference, especially on a discussion board created for the purpose of discussing topics about Mormonism.
Glenn101 Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 17 hours ago, hope_for_things said: He was demoted in my opinion, This seems to be a personal thing with you and a few others. Several posters have already noted what the church teaches about the importance of callings, i.e. that none are more important than another and it is not where one serves but how one serves, as noted so many years ago by J. Reuben Clark. The more important thing is how does Elder Uchtdorf view his new/old situation. He said that he is thrilled to be back among his brethren of the twelve and, absent some compelling evidence otherwise, I am taking his word for it. I do not believe that Elder Uchtdorf was seeking the position as one of the twelve in the first place, nor that he was seeking/hoping for a position as a counselor in the First Presidency.
hope_for_things Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 9 hours ago, The Nehor said: I think vitality would be better demonstrated through doing Home Teaching, studying the scriptures, and serving in the church, family, and community. Nitpickey worrying about a General Authority shifting position is an incredibly lazy form of vitality I think we could do without. Then why spend time on a discussion board? It always strikes me as odd when I see people comment about an article somewhere online, and their comment essentially is complaining that this article was even written in the first place. No-one is forcing people to read and comment and participate in these discussions, use your agency and do something else if that's what you find worthwhile.
hope_for_things Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 9 hours ago, Rain said: The church teaches that no calling is more important, though HTing and VTing may be an exception to the idea. Why people are sensitive - because the church teaches that no callings are more important than others, then the idea that someone is upset about a "demotion" is like saying someone thinks they are too good to be in a lower calling or that they are arrogant, full of themselves, care more for worldly power than the humble and meek character traits of the Savior. There are so many dynamics with people being sensitive over this. First you have people defending a loved one over an accusation they feel doesn't apply to the loved one. Imagine people all over the Internet saying your dad was mean, but you always knew him to be kind. Then you have people that have never had leadership callings. Some of them can be at peace knowing that is ok, because they have always been taught that it doesn't matter what the calling is. It only matters that they magnify the calling. Now though they are not ok, because they will never be worthy in God's eyes. If going back to the 12 is a demotion then the people feel lied to. Don't we have enough people who feel that way? Do we really want to add more people? Fair comments Rain, thanks I think your thoughts on here are valid. These topics can be complicated and there are people all over the spectrum who could have sensitive feelings on various topics. Some of the challenge of interacting with many different perspectives is that people can get upset or feel offended and that can bring out the worst in others at times. I've had multiple participants on this thread who have decided that personally insulting me is a fair tactic to employ, so obviously there is some sensitivity on this subject. I'm sad about the Uchtdorf change, I wish he was still in the FP. I personally view it as a demotion. I'm sad that he won't be speaking at GC as much as in the past. His talk in 2013 was a Godsend to me at a time that I was severely struggling in the church and questioning everything, and it really helped me to feel like someone cared, like someone understood what I was going through and someone validated my experience. Are my feelings different than some others, yes. When others attempt to minimize my views on this issue how does that make me feel? So, you bring up some good thoughts on how people are sensitive over this topic, and I would just add that there are others like myself who have sensitivities as well, that if we are to take everyone's sensitive feelings into account, that we should be careful and respectful as much as possible of each other. 2
hope_for_things Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: It is tiresome that you would make the automatic assumption that committee assignments are secret based on your own incompetence in use of the internet, and on the automatic assumption that I and others need to do your research work for you. As I already told you, I have never bothered to look any of that up, and see no reason to do so. Serious researchers and historians (such as Mike Quinn, for example) have no problem discovering such matters, and I would suggest that you turn to such sources if you want to understand the corporate functions of the Brethren. Stop playing the blame game, and deal with such issues in an adult, scholarly manner. I didn't assume they are secret, I'm not sure where you are coming up with these assumptions of motive that you keep making about me. Very disrespectful. How am I blaming anyone, this is crazy talk. I'm asking if the committee assignments are public knowledge and posted anywhere. I personally haven't come across them, and I made the point that the Uchtdorf announcement of him taking on specific assignments is something that I can't recall seeing in the past, and that his status seems to have taken on an almost celebrity status within the hierarchy.
hope_for_things Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: You crave smooth acceptance of everything you whine about, and you will certainly find it with Mr Rogers. No need for rational dialogue. No jarring reality therapy from anyone, and certainly no red minuses on a college composition, because that might be upsetting. And we can't have that, can we? We'd rather be told what we want to hear, without any negative consequences. Tra-la-la. None of the snark or accusations about me are fair or accurate, but I will note that I'm looking forward to watching this documentary that Radio West did an interview on the other day. Fred Rogers, pretty great guy. http://radiowest.kuer.org/post/sundance-2018-wont-you-be-my-neighbor 1
Robert F. Smith Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 15 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: None of the snark or accusations about me are fair or accurate, but I will note that I'm looking forward to watching this documentary that Radio West did an interview on the other day. Fred Rogers, pretty great guy. http://radiowest.kuer.org/post/sundance-2018-wont-you-be-my-neighbor Yeh, certainly a better man than me. I listened to that radio show and that's why I mentioned him this time around. I didn't grow up with Fred Rogers, but have always been impressed with his uncanny understanding of children. Yet, as Beyonce sings, "We all had to grow up,"
Calm Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: It is tiresome that you would make the automatic assumption that committee assignments are secret based on your own incompetence in use of the internet, and on the automatic assumption that I and others need to do your research work for you. As I already told you, I have never bothered to look any of that up, and see no reason to do so. Serious researchers and historians (such as Mike Quinn, for example) have no problem discovering such matters, and I would suggest that you turn to such sources if you want to understand the corporate functions of the Brethren. Stop playing the blame game, and deal with such issues in an adult, scholarly manner. When my head is back on straight, hope, after a sleep to counteract my early morn adventure...you and I can get together and see if we can find it ourselves. It will be an interesting measure of accessibility for the resources most Americans have at hand, since most won't have books and such...that is unless someone has done it already. If not, After google, if that is a bust, I can walk down the block to our local library that has carried other Quinn books, so might have it.
ksfisher Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 I believe President Oaks was chair of the missionary executive council.
Scott Lloyd Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 3 hours ago, Bobbieaware said: I. get your point and respect it, but I very much doubt on this specific topic, the recent change in the quorum of the First Presidency, that an obviously intelligent lifelong member of the Church isn’t fully aware of the fact that the use of the word ‘demotion’ is going to be viewed by faithful members of the Church as a provocation and a deliberately intended insult to the new Church President and President Uchtdorf. Every knowledgeable member of the Church knows we’ve been taught for generations that it’s not where we serve but how we serve. But even if one wants to look at this recent event from the point of view of carnal human competitiveness, it’s hard to imagine that a prophet, seer and revelator of Jesus Christ, who’s just been advanced in seniority one step closer to eventually becoming the senior apostle, has somehow been demoted and humiliated. Factor in a long history of disrespect toward the leaders of the Church and the viability of the cluelessness excuse becomes even more remote. Point well taken. I find myself wondering about this unsolicited and unwanted sentiment that Elder Uchtdorf has somehow been slighted or ill-used. Do people not realize that membership in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, never mind the First Presidency, is a distinction that will come to only an infinitesimal portion of the membership of the Church? That simply being in the quorum assures one's place in history regardless of what else happens? That remaining as a functioning member of the quorum is strong indication that one stands approved of God? 1
The Nehor Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 1 hour ago, hope_for_things said: Then why spend time on a discussion board? It always strikes me as odd when I see people comment about an article somewhere online, and their comment essentially is complaining that this article was even written in the first place. No-one is forcing people to read and comment and participate in these discussions, use your agency and do something else if that's what you find worthwhile. I am doing things here I find worthwhile and enjoyable. *Evil Laugh*
hope_for_things Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 7 minutes ago, Calm said: When my head is back on straight, hope, after a sleep to counteract my early morn adventure...you and I can get together and see if we can find it ourselves. It will be an interesting measure of accessibility for the resources most Americans have at hand, since most won't have books and such...that is unless someone has done it already. If not, After google, if that is a bust, I can walk down the block to our local library that has carried other Quinn books, so might have it. I'm happy to do a little more exploring. I'm not sure how Quinn's books can address current assignments though, that's what I'm interested in. Its probably safe to say at this point that if the committee assignments are publicly accessible, that at the very least, this knowledge is not widely disseminated, or I would imagine that someone among this knowledgeable group would know about how to access the information.
Scott Lloyd Posted January 23, 2018 Posted January 23, 2018 12 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said: Yeh, certainly a better man than me. I listened to that radio show and that's why I mentioned him this time around. I didn't grow up with Fred Rogers, but have always been impressed with his uncanny understanding of children. Yet, as Beyonce sings, "We all had to grow up," I'm wondering why you're highlighting Beyonce when it is Josh Groban who owns that song from "Polar Express." Incidentally, I finally learned the guitar chord progression for that song this immediately past Christmas season. It was easier than I expected. 1
Recommended Posts