Expectations of a prophet…

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 minutes ago, 2BizE said:

I believe that prophets have led us astray from BY to President Kimball regarding black members and the priesthood and the temple.  

I don't.

See how this works?

[ttribe]

19 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

From where I'm standing, the most common reason folks lose faith/testimony/belief in this church, is an unrealistic expectation goes unmet.  When someone doesn't know why they believe what they believe, when they aren't even sure what they believe, and something comes along that throws 'em for a loop, they don't know what else to do besides leave.

Oh really? Have you ever left? Do you spend much time with people who've left and tried to actually understand their reasons?  I can tell you that I've left and I regularly associate with a number of exmos and your "most common reason" narrative doesn't begin to apply to me or the people I know.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Actually, Eldred G. Smith was called as presiding patriarch after this release.

The scandal had not yet been disclosed publicly at that time.  When it was disclosed, Patriarch Eldred Smith was forced to retire from the position.   Just as I said.

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, Moneymaking said:

I suppose with the standard being so low what is the point of taking any of them seriously? Good chance they may be in error- purposely.  It is odd that we as an American society expect higher standards of our police officers than we do with our (LDS) religious leaders in terms of racism and honesty. Sure they are flawed as well but we don’t make excuses for them. 

False.  In fact, the Supreme Court came up with qualified immunity for law enforcement officers, and they have always been given the benefit of the doubt -- although recent use of dash-cams, body-cams, and cell phone cameras have verified many claims of misbehavior that were ignored in the past, so that officers now have to worry about being sued, fired, or indicted.

The point you seem to be missing (a fairly common problem) is that all humans are deeply flawed, some more than others.  Expecting too much of our various leaders, both secular and religious, is unwise and unrealistic.

[Hamba Tuhan]

12 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The scandal had not yet been disclosed publicly at that time.  When it was disclosed, Patriarch Eldred Smith was forced to retire from the position.   Just as I said.

CFR, please.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, Fether said:

Ummm… things have progressed on all sorts of matters. I’m not saying our nature is becoming better. But societal norms have definitely progressed to a point where topics of sex aren’t so taboo, we talk more freely about issues in the church, and there have been large strides in dropping shame focused teachings

I'm 80 now.  Have seen a lot over the years, and I can say with certainty that we see regression rather than progress in societal norms.  Scholars generally agree that progress is a myth.

[James 1 5]

Nice clarification, this: So what about the idea that the prophet will never lead the Church astray? ...

Prophets will not lead us away from their true witness of Jesus Christ, from His revelations, or from the path to follow Him.

[Robert F. Smith]

11 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

CFR, please.

The public did not know why Joseph Fielding Smith II was relieved of his position (a cover story was used).  Later it was revealed that the cause had been his homosexual activity.  When that was publicly revealed, the office itself was eliminated (when Eldred G. Smith held it).

E. Gary Smith and Irene M. Bates, Lost Legacy: The Mormon Office of Presiding Patriarch, 2nd ed. (University of Illinois Press, 2018).

http://www.connellodonovan.com/smith.html

https://lattergaystories.org/joseph-fielding-smith/

 

 

 

[CV75]

@Fether Some mistakes discussed in Saints Volumes 1 and 2: pestering the Lord to share a manuscript, various and sundry financial decisions, trusting a betrayer despite the red flags and warning of others, poor behavior on excursions, poor decisions at all levels on moving to OH, IL, MO, westward, etc. -- too many to mention.

I did do a VERY quick search and found this, I'm sure will be more dilligent:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/latter-day-saint-history-1815-1846-teacher-material/lesson-4?lang=eng "Because of this mistake, Joseph Smith lost the gift to translate for a time. After the Prophet’s gift was restored, the Lord sent Oliver Cowdery to assist him in the work of translation."

 

 

 

[Robert F. Smith]

4 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

Nice clarification, this: So what about the idea that the prophet will never lead the Church astray? ...

Prophets will not lead us away from their true witness of Jesus Christ, from His revelations, or from the path to follow Him.

What for you would constitute "leading the church astray"?  Does that have to be a big or small matter?  Is it only that a prophet (we have a group of them) can only be expected to be a true witness of Jesus Christ, his revelations, and his path?  And what does that mean?  What about Brother Brigham's departure from sound doctrine on Africans, or on Adam-God, etc.  Why did Apostle Orson Pratt (also a prophet seer and revelator) oppose Brother Brigham so vociferously on those issues?  How is that Elder Pratt turns out (today) to have been so right, and Pres Young so wrong?

[James 1 5]

1 minute ago, Robert F. Smith said:

What for you would constitute "leading the church astray"?  Does that have to be a big or small matter?  Is it only that a prophet (we have a group of them) can only be expected to be a true witness of Jesus Christ, his revelations, and his path?  And what does that mean?  What about Brother Brigham's departure from sound doctrine on Africans, or on Adam-God, etc.  Why did Apostle Orson Pratt (also a prophet seer and revelator) oppose Brother Brigham so vociferously on those issues?  How is that Elder Pratt turns out (today) to have been so right, and Pres Young so wrong?

I was answering that question from an excerpt of the article in the OP.  A beautiful clarification.  I'll repeat it now here:  Prophets will not lead us away from their true witness of Jesus Christ, from His revelations, or from the path to follow Him.

[Hamba Tuhan]

28 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The public did not know why Joseph Fielding Smith II was relieved of his position (a cover story was used).  Later it was revealed that the cause had been his homosexual activity.  When that was publicly revealed, the office itself was eliminated (when Eldred G. Smith held it).

E. Gary Smith and Irene M. Bates, Lost Legacy: The Mormon Office of Presiding Patriarch, 2nd ed. (University of Illinois Press, 2018).

http://www.connellodonovan.com/smith.html

https://lattergaystories.org/joseph-fielding-smith/

Thanks. Neither of the online resources you've linked to, however, specifically support the claim you're making: 'When that was publicly revealed, the office itself was eliminated (when Eldred G. Smith held it)'. And a Google Books search (though limited) isn't showing that in the monograph either. Anything else?

Edited February 8, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[randy]

10 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Thanks. Neither of the online resources you've linked to, however, specifically support the claim you're making: 'When that was publicly revealed, the office itself was eliminated (when Eldred G. Smith held it)'. And a Google Books search (though limited) isn't showing that in the book either. Anything else?

I had always been under the impression that the reason for the discontinuation of the office was because of the growth of the Church and the availability of a Patriarch in the Stakes...that the necessitity for a Presiding Patriarch was no longer needed. I must confess...that I did have a difficult time with this change.  I understand the rational for it, but I suppose my difficulty stemmed from my wanting to continue that direct connection to Joseph and Hyrum in the presiding councils of the Church.   To be clear....when I say "direct connection" I am referring to the "Smith" name.   I understand that Pres. Ballard is a direct descendant of Hyrum Smith.

Edited February 8, 2022 by randy

[jkwilliams]

10 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

 

This is me, but perhaps in a more literal way than you meant.  I didn’t leave because my expectations were too high. I left because they were too low  

 

I kept lowering and lowering my expectations. I found that I could keep attending and serving this way and did so for at least a decade. There came a point though when I stepped back and looked - and my expectations were so low (in order to match reality as I saw it) that there was no room for the divine left in the church and it’s  leadership.

It’s interesting that they keep telling us the reasons why we left, as if listening to the real reasons would be wrong. Gaslighting is indeed what it is. 

I’m with you. I got tired of rationalizing all the things I knew were wrong and/or untrue. At some point it hurts your conscience and your intellect to lower your standards, as you put it. 

[jkwilliams]

12 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Thanks. Neither of the online resources you've linked to, however, specifically support the claim you're making: 'When that was publicly revealed, the office itself was eliminated (when Eldred G. Smith held it)'. And a Google Books search (though limited) isn't showing that in the monograph either. Anything else?

My understanding is that Eldred G. Smith felt the patriarch had been minimized and was agitating with the brethren to have a higher profile. President Kimball apparently decided it wasn’t worth the trouble. 

[Stormin' Mormon]

5 hours ago, Moneymaking said:

It is odd that we as an American society expect higher standards of our police officers than we do with our (LDS) religious leaders in terms of racism and honesty.

Well this is just silly. Nobody asks for or expects perfection from police officers. Therefore, you'll never hear people make excuses for cops who fail to live up to that impossible standard.

LDS prophetic leaders, on the other hand, are often held to an impossible standard of perfection. You'll only hear excuses being made for them in discussions where this unattainable standard is wielded against them.

I expect prophetic leaders to be good, honest, and fair-dealing people. I expect them to be among the best. Most importantly, I expect them to be trying to be those things, even when they fail. It's in that constant, dedicated, tireless trying that elevates them and makes them exemplars.

[bluebell]

56 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

It’s interesting that they keep telling us the reasons why we left, as if listening to the real reasons would be wrong. Gaslighting is indeed what it is. 

I’m with you. I got tired of rationalizing all the things I knew were wrong and/or untrue. At some point it hurts your conscience and your intellect to lower your standards, as you put it. 

Maybe it's time that we all admit that when we talk about why we stay or why we left, it can legitimately sound like assigning bad faith motives to those who have chosen the opposite course.  And then we could decide to ignore the temptation to take such things personally (and save the fights and bad-motive assigning to other things )

I could complain that you are implying in this post that I have to rationalize my motives for staying, or that I have no conscience or a low intellect, or have lowered my standards, for staying.  Because you have basically said here that it's impossible to stay without doing those things.  Especially considering that you and I have very similar knowledge bases, as far as history of the church and all that goes.  

I could 1) assume that you are "telling me the reasons that I'm staying instead of listening to the real reasons" (We could even argue about whether or not you are gaslighting me if you denied that's what you were doing, allowing us to circle that fun drain forever), or I could 2) understand that it's really really hard to explain why you believe you have chosen the better path without sounding like people who have chosen the opposite are inferior in some way.

And I could grant an allowance for the difficulty of such an endeavor and try not to take it personally.  Because there isn't one person on this board that has not had someone from the opposite camp tell them they were ____________ (fill in the blank something bad) for either leaving or staying.  I'd say the score on the 'gaslighting' is pretty even for both sides.

I know that I have not made such allowances in the past and I apologize for being so self-focused in those exchanges.  I'm going to do better, because I don't want to be this annoying anymore.  

 

 

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Thanks. Neither of the online resources you've linked to, however, specifically support the claim you're making: 'When that was publicly revealed, the office itself was eliminated (when Eldred G. Smith held it)'. And a Google Books search (though limited) isn't showing that in the monograph either. Anything else?

I just wanted you to correctly understand the sequence of events.  I can recall that a friend of mine was very incensed that someone had revealed the nature of the scandal, and the embarrassment led to eliminating the office -- there were other reasons too.  However, I did not make a note of it in a computer file, and am not sure where the claim is among my papers, but the date would be around 1978-79, and the publication would be in something like Sunstone.  Since my friend is now in the throes of dementia, I can't ask him.  Sorry.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

My understanding is that Eldred G. Smith felt the patriarch had been minimized and was agitating with the brethren to have a higher profile. President Kimball apparently decided it wasn’t worth the trouble. 

There were a host of reasons going back many decades.  There was already tension over the existence of the Church Patriarch position long before Eldred G. Smith took over.  This reminds me of the variety of religious structures historically.  Our modern structure is merely one among many legitimate formats.  The Church itself can be modified to suit whatever God and the Brethren want.

[Hamba Tuhan]

8 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I just wanted you to correctly understand the sequence of events.

Thanks. I'm fully aware of the sequence of events. Without any documentary evidence, however, I think that interpreting the sequence creates a classic post hoc ergo propter hoc risk.

[Robert F. Smith]

2 minutes ago, Moneymaking said:

Yea the govt comes up with a rule to protect itself. WE as a society demand better conduct of our police officers. The church protects its own leaders but I think it not unreasonable for the membership to expect our prophets to be both honest and not racist. It isn’t hard to do either one of those things. 
we expect it of our cops, surely a prophet of god can reach that standard as well…. 
we know the prophets are flawed. “Deeply” as you put it. If they are that flawed why listen to them? I mean cant any one of us make morally correct decisions or do we need someone to tell us what to do? 

Making morally correct decisions is not easy for anyone.  Most of us need to regularly pray to God for help in making good decisions, and for help in repenting of our bad decisions.  The unconditional love of a mother helps many of us in getting a grounding in good decision-making, later followed by our having to manage that on our own, maybe with a little help from our friends.

A great scholar and colleague of mine once said to me that "we keep each other honest."  So too do cops and religious leaders need good partners to keep them on the straight and narrow.  It is a fantasy to suggest that it's easy.  History teaches us the exact opposite.

[Stormin' Mormon]

3 minutes ago, Moneymaking said:

For people who claim to talk to and speak for god I do hold them to a higher standard. The point I’m making is we can both agree that our prophets and police officers are human and prone to make mistakes. The difference is we make excuses for the prophets and try and prosecute the cops. Cops are held to a higher standard. 

I don't think the comparison is apt. We prosecute cops who commit crimes. We make excuses for prophets who say mean things or fail to behave with exacting honesty. 

If Russell M. Nelson were to shoot someone in cold blood, I would be among the most ardent in wanting him prosecuted. Because, quite frankly, I do hold him to a higher standard than the average citizen, even the average boy in blue.

[Robert F. Smith]

8 minutes ago, Moneymaking said:

For people who claim to talk to and speak for god I do hold them to a higher standard. The point I’m making is we can both agree that our prophets and police officers are human and prone to make mistakes. The difference is we make excuses for the prophets and try and prosecute the cops. Cops are held to a higher standard. 

I don't think so.  Cops and religious leaders should be prosecuted equally for committing crimes, yet cops are far more likely to go to jail.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 minutes ago, Moneymaking said:

How hard is it to not be racist in 1978? Maybe my opinion of our leaders was away to high?

I have always surmised that God did not allow a revelation until 1978 because the Latter-day Saints were still too racist for it.  The Brethren weren't there with Dr King in the 1960s civil rights movement.  Some of them should have been there in Selma, Alabama, on the Edmund Pettis Bridge in 1965.  Pettis, by the way, was a leader of the KKK.

As with the ancient Israelites, God deals with his people according to their willingness to obey.  His people are always recalcitrant.

[Stormin' Mormon]

8 minutes ago, Moneymaking said:

How hard is it to not be racist in 1978? Maybe my opinion of our leaders was away to high?

All 15 members of the policy quorums of the Church had to be in unanimous agreement before the ban could be overturned. There is documentary evidence that leaders had been attempting to overturn the ban for decades before 1978. 

If 7% of the policy quorums can prevent a change like that, you can't draw conclusions about how racist the other 93% were.