On Elder Renlund's "Arrogant and Unproductive" Comment ("Demanding revelation from God is both...")

[mrmarklin]

13 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I find more disturbing the implicit assumption that God would try to control Her. Also that God would want to.

Please do not read that into my words. God “controls” his wife the same as most husbands.  Not at all. When you marry, you will gain this insight

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, mrmarklin said:

Please do not read that into my words. God “controls” his wife the same as most husbands.  Not at all.

I don’t think you understood what I meant.

1 hour ago, mrmarklin said:

When you marry, you will gain this insight

I will probably have to get any insight some other way or do without. I have little hope my marital status will change.

I am not sure why marital status is needed to reach this conclusion.

My happiest relationship we literally switched off who was in charge of any joint decisions for a time. It was a fun game. Did a number on my chauvinism and killed a lot of it. Gave both of us boosts to self-assurance and confidence.

[Meadowchik]

13 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Do you ever have a sense of unity with someone where you are the other and the other is you to the point where "other" makes no sense?

Sounds like an unhealthy relationship, especially for human beings. If you think you've experienced that, I'm skeptical and would bet that in such a case one or both people have adapted to having lesser agency. And in that, it might seem nice and it definitely can appear peaceful, but that's not a relationship of two equals, nor one of mutual respect.

 

[mfbukowski]

I'm outa here.

Hope life gets better for y'all 

[mfbukowski]

19 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Sounds like an unhealthy relationship, especially for human beings. If you think you've experienced that, I'm skeptical and would bet that in such a case one or both people have adapted to having lesser agency. And in that, it might seem nice and it definitely can appear peaceful, but that's not a relationship of two equals, nor one of mutual respect.

 

So you deny we can become Christlike, huh.?

Sorry.

Try harder. You get what you create, or else you are the one not controlling your agency.

Agency is creative need fulfillment leading to happiness 

But to deny it's possibility?

Just sad

Edited April 24, 2022 by mfbukowski

[Meadowchik]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

So you deny we can become Christlike, huh.?

Sorry.

Try harder. You get what you create, or else you are the one not controlling your agency.

Agency is creative need fulfillment leading to happiness 

But to deny it's possibility?

Just sad

No I don't deny it, and when I said that I thought of my parents' fifty-plus year marriage.

The last year was when my mom was terminally ill. When she was able, she taught dad how to order his regular items online, how to cook his veggies the way he liked, and how to use the remotes. Dad took care of her and stretched himself more than ever.

I was able to stay with them over the summer, just me and them for several weeks. It was quiet and loving and I had one of the most edifying spiritual experiences of my life as my mom practiced the piano and dad and I listened.

But dad was still dad, and mom was still mom. And that made it even better. Their ability to each have self, but then love each other the way they did and also love me--not to mention all my many siblings--was the epitome of Christlike. 

Edited April 24, 2022 by Meadowchik

[Meadowchik]

There's unity arising out of conformity and then there's unity that arises out of mutual collaboration. If we do have a God the Father and Heavenly Mother, I would think they are who they are, at least in part, because they--having glory and wisdom--choose to each participant in creation. I don't think they would have to lose themselves. In fact, I think that consistent respect for themselves as an Other Being would make their eternal relationship sustainable and glorious.

 

 

Edited April 24, 2022 by Meadowchik

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

There's unity arising out of conformity and then there's unity that arises out of mutual collaboration. If we do have a God the Father and Heavenly Mother, I would think they are who they are, at least in part, because they--having glory and wisdom--choose to each participant in creation. I don't think they would have to lose themselves. In fact, I think that consistent respect for themselves as an Other Being would make their eternal relationship sustainable and glorious.

 

 

The Godhead is formed by unity in collaboration.

Yes, we agree.  Semantics as usual

 

Edited April 24, 2022 by mfbukowski

[Teancum]

On 4/21/2022 at 5:28 PM, smac97 said:

In his Saturday Evening Session talk, Elder Renlund said the following:

He goes on to elaborate on this second truth:

His main points:

• "The doctrine of a Heavenly Mother comes by revelation and is a distinctive belief among Latter-day Saints."
• "Very little has been revealed about Mother in Heaven, but what we do know is summarized in a gospel topic found in our Gospel Library application."
• It is fine to "wish" to know "more," and we may "still have questions" and "want to find more answers," but we need to be "cautious," to avoid "speculation," and to follow the revelations we have been given (as to the manner of prayer).
• Prophets, both past and present, "cannot go beyond the word of the Lord ... to do less or more."
• Here's the part that seems to have created controversy: "Demanding revelation from God is both arrogant and unproductive. Instead, we wait on the Lord and His timetable to reveal His truths through the means that He has established."

From the Tribune today:

I think the "Bishop Bill" entry linked to above takes a fairly jaundiced approach to Elder Renlund's talk:

No, I don't think that is what he is saying.

Asking for revelation and waiting for it are allowed (and encouraged, even commanded).  Demanding it, on the other hand . . .

"Wherefore, brethren, seek not to counsel the Lord, but to take counsel from his hand."  (Jacob 4:10.)  "Wherefore, enter ye in at the gate, as I have commanded, and seek not to counsel your God. Amen."  (D&C 22:4.)

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

The key word is demanding. So I agree with you.  It might have helped if he further said inquire, petition, seek but also accept the Lord's time.

[Bernard Gui]

On 4/22/2022 at 3:40 PM, Calm said:

There are modern leaders teaching he is male.  Is there anything in scriptures that tells us not to pray to Heavenly Mother?  I can only recall saying pray to the Father, but there is wiggle room for praying to Christ imo (Nephites doing it).  My memory is we only get definite instructions to pray only to the Father (as opposed to instruction to pray to the Father) from modern leaders.

Then there is this…”and they pray unto me because I am with them.” When he was not with them, “they were praying unto the Father in his name.” And, 

Quote

3 Nephi 18:19 Therefore ye must always pray unto the Father in my name;
20 And whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, which is right, believing that ye shall receive, behold it shall be given unto you.
21 Pray in your families unto the Father, always in my name, that your wives and your children may be blessed.

Matthew 6:6 Enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

3 Nephi 13:6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father who is in secret; and thy Father, who seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.

 

I don’t recall any instructions about praying to the Mother in his name either openly or secretly, though.

Edited April 25, 2022 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

On 4/21/2022 at 5:28 PM, smac97 said:

Seeking greater understanding is an important part of our spiritual development, but please be cautious. Reason cannot replace revelation.

Then there is this….

Quote

In the heav’ns are parents single?

No, the thought makes reason stare!

Truth is reason; truth eternal

Tells me I’ve a mother there.
 

 

[HappyJackWagon]

On 4/22/2022 at 7:25 PM, bluebell said:

This is why I think it would be very useful for the Brethren to tells us if they have been seeking further instruction or knowledge on a subject.  That would stop people from spending so much time and effort being angry that the prophets are refusing to go to God about the issue, when they don't even know that they aren't.

When I heard Elder Renlund say that about not demanding, I assumed that he was speaking from a position of "we've asked for more but haven't gotten anything yet and it's inappropriate for us to demand an answer," but that's as much of an assumption as the "they refuse to ask, otherwise they would agree with me" crowd.

Because neither camp has any idea or evidence to support our conclusions.  A little more transparency on this kind of thing would be helpful.

Amen!

The highest levels of church leadership happen almost exclusively behind closed doors. There are certainly processes of leadership in which the ability to speak freely without criticism  from the masses is important. But as a church we have VERY little knowledge about how the church actually functions beyond a few vagaries. We don't know what issues are discussed. We don't know finances, etc. Personally, I don't see that level of a lack of accountability to be very helpful in any organization.

[JustAnAustralian]

5 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

The highest levels of church leadership happen almost exclusively behind closed doors.

The lowest levels of church leadership is no different. The ward doesn't know what issues are discussed in bishopric meetings, the ward doesn't know what the ward finances are etc. (The same applies for organisational presidency meetings). I don't know what the YW Presidency discussed in their last meeting. I don't know what the Primary Presidency discussed in their last meeting.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, JustAnAustralian said:

The lowest levels of church leadership is no different. The ward doesn't know what issues are discussed in bishopric meetings, the ward doesn't know what the ward finances are etc. (The same applies for organisational presidency meetings). I don't know what the YW Presidency discussed in their last meeting. I don't know what the Primary Presidency discussed in their last meeting.

I see what you are saying, but I don't know that this is an apples to apples comparison though.  

The authority of the quorum of the 12 and First presidency to enact doctrine and policy that is binding on the rest of the membership cannot really be compared to the authority of any other presidency.  And of course we are specifically talking about seeking the Lord for further revelation on doctrinal topics.  That isn't comparable to any other presidency in the church either.

But even if we want to compare upper and lower church leadership despite those differences, I do think that the lowest levels of leadership work differently.

Can you imagine going to the RS president to see if you could do a specific activity for an activity, being told that that is completely up to the bishop but she didn't think he would approve, but then never told if the RS president actually asked the bishop if it was ok or not?

I can't imagine it because I've never seen a presidency (or organization president) work that way.  We may not know what is going on in their presidency meetings but one thing none of them tend to keep secret is whether or not they've asked a 'higher up' if something you want to do is ok or not.  That, at least, is (in my experience) always 100% transparent.

[JustAnAustralian]

55 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Can you imagine going to the RS president to see if you could do a specific activity for an activity, being told that that is completely up to the bishop but she didn't think he would approve, but then never told if the RS president actually asked the bishop if it was ok or not?

Are you saying that asking a Bishop if a certain activity is permissible is the same as seeking revelation?

[bluebell]

13 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said:

Are you saying that asking a Bishop if a certain activity is permissible is the same as seeking revelation?

No, but that's not what I'm saying either.  It's not about seeking revelation, but about knowing whether or not revelation is being sought.  So being told 'no' by the RS president, without knowing if she ever asked the person in charge if it was ok or not, is in some ways comparable to being told 'no' by the apostles without knowing if they ever asked the One in charge.

Because wanting to know if revelation is being sought is not at all the same thing as demanding that revelation occur.

I think that analogy is more comparable and works better than the one that you attempted to make between not knowing what happens in the local primary presidency meeting and not knowing if the Brethren have sought any revelation on how you and I can better relate to Heavenly Mother while teaching that no further revelation is available.

I just don't see how those two things are really comparable at all.

 

Edited April 26, 2022 by bluebell

[Chum]

On 4/24/2022 at 12:45 AM, mrmarklin said:

God “controls” his wife the same as most husbands.  Not at all. When you marry, you will gain this insight

I'm a little offput with the notion that controlling women might be on the table for us, anywhere at all.  Not calling you out. I'm just reacting to it's recurrence in the thread.

Edited April 26, 2022 by Chum

[Chum]

On 4/21/2022 at 9:19 PM, Navidad said:

Hi my friend: I still struggle with understanding and differentiating between the LDS idea of beliefs and truths. You started the thread with a statement that you say contains four truths, including the truth of a Heavenly Mother. Then you quote Elder Renlund, or President Dallin Oaks, I am not sure which, that the doctrine of a Heavenly Mother is a distinctive belief of the Saints. I understand the part of it being a distinctive or unique belief - - would you also agree that it is a distinctive LDS truth as opposed to Truth - as in absolute Truth? Do you know a truth such as this, or do you faith a truth such as this? Is someone who doesn't faith or know this truth wrong, or do they simply hold different distinctive truths; neither of you being "right" or "wrong" in your distinctive and unique beliefs. I hope my questions are clear and that you don't mind me asking them. Thanks.

It could be internal/external perspective. We know a truth and that truth is seen as our belief.

[Navidad]

9 hours ago, Chum said:

It could be internal/external perspective. We know a truth and that truth is seen as our belief.

Would you agree that "It could be internal/external perspective. We know a belief and that belief is seen as our truth"? Or is your belief seen as thee Truth?

Edited April 27, 2022 by Navidad

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Would you agree that "It could be internal/external perspective. We know a belief and that belief is seen as our truth"? Or is your beliefs seen as thee Truth?

Imo, from our perception it is a truth.  It may be a truth in God’s perception as well though.

Edited April 26, 2022 by Calm

[smac97]

On 4/25/2022 at 5:09 PM, JustAnAustralian said:

Quote

The highest levels of church leadership happen almost exclusively behind closed doors. There are certainly processes of leadership in which the ability to speak freely without criticism  from the masses is important. But as a church we have VERY little knowledge about how the church actually functions beyond a few vagaries. We don't know what issues are discussed. We don't know finances, etc. Personally, I don't see that level of a lack of accountability to be very helpful in any organization.

The lowest levels of church leadership is no different. The ward doesn't know what issues are discussed in bishopric meetings, the ward doesn't know what the ward finances are etc. (The same applies for organisational presidency meetings). I don't know what the YW Presidency discussed in their last meeting. I don't know what the Primary Presidency discussed in their last meeting.

Most members of the ward simply don't care about what the bishopric and the ward council talk about, most of which topics are fairly mundane and unremarkable.

This is distinguishable, then, from some of the goings-on at "{t}he highest levels of church leadership," which often involves policies and decisions that affect the lives of millions of people.  

That said, I don't think HappyJackWagon's characterization is very reasonable.  We actually know quite a bit about how the higher-ups function, quite a bit more than "a few vagaries." 

We know the structure of the Church, from the highest echelons down to the ward-level leadership positions. 

We have periodic anecdotal descriptions by members of the FP/Q12 regarding their meetings, experiences, etc. 

We also know that the members of the FP/Q12 and the Seventies are constantly traveling, attending meetings, working with regional and local leaders, and so on.  These folks are working very hard.  

We know about the various quorums, and the members of those quorums, and the background of those members. 

We have the Church Handbook, which was previously available through the bishop and is now available to everyone online.  The Handbook goes into great length explaining various policies and procedures. 

We have the Church website, which has extensive resources readily available to the general public.

We have all sorts of books, articles, etc. about the Church, many (most?) of which are not published by the Church, but which nevertheless provide lots of information.

We have the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, which includes articles about all sorts of matters of Church governance and procedure.  For example:

Quote

FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION.

On July 8, 1838, a revelation was received by the Prophet Joseph Smith making known the method for the disbursement of tithing received by the Church: "Verily, thus saith the Lord, the time is now come, that it [tithing] shall be disposed of by a council, composed of the First Presidency of my Church, and of the bishop and his council, and by my high council" (D&C 120:1).

Subsequently, the Council on the Disposition of Tithes, consisting of the First Presidency of the Church, the quorum of twelve apostles, and the Presiding Bishopric, was established. This council meets regularly and oversees the expenditures of all Church funds worldwide. It approves budgets and financial strategy and establishes financial policy.

Two subcommittees of the Council on the Disposition of Tithes are the Budget Committee and the Appropriations Committee. Both committees consist of the First Presidency, selected members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and members of the Presiding Bishopric.

The Church Budget Office provides staff support to the First Presidency and gives overall administrative direction to the preparation of the annual Church budget. At the beginning of each annual budgeting cycle, budget guidelines are given to Church administrative department heads, international offices, missions, temples, and other units. Within these guidelines, budgets are constructed at the lowest levels of accountability and scrupulously reviewed through various levels of management and councils. The Budget Committee meets periodically to provide in-depth budget review and to formulate budget recommendations to the Council on the Disposition of Tithes.

The Appropriations Committee meets each week. All expenditure requests throughout the world, except those few which have been delegated to a lower level of administration by the Council on the Disposition of Tithes, are reviewed, checked to make certain the request is within budget, and appropriated. Expenditures that have been delegated are reported to the committee.

FINANCIAL CONTROLS. Financial controls are administered through the use of financial policy, budgeting, organization structure, and regular, comprehensive audits. Key financial policy comes from the Council on the Disposition of Tithes. Additional financial policy and procedure directives are issued by the Finance and Records Department, which, under the direction of the First Presidency and the Presiding Bishopric, is responsible for the administration of treasury accounting/controllership, taxation, and risk-management functions.

The Church has an Audit Committee composed of experienced businessmen who are not associated with the Church as employees or General Authorities. This committee reports directly to the First Presidency of the Church and works closely with the Finance and Records Department and the Auditing Department to ensure strict adherence to ethical principles and rigid financial policies and procedures. The Auditing Department also reports directly to the First Presidency of the Church and thus maintains its independence from all other departments. Its staff of certified public accountants performs ongoing audits of finance, operation, and computer systems for Church departments and other Church-controlled organizations. Responses to all audits are required and are monitored.

PARTICIPATION AND INVESTMENTS IN BUSINESS. The First Presidency has established other boards and committees to oversee the management of the Church's investments and reserves (see Business: Church Participation in Business). Each of these key committees is chaired either by a member of the First Presidency or by another appointed General Authority.

The Investment Policy Committee is chaired by the First Presidency and includes the president of the Council of the Twelve, other members of the Twelve as appointed, and the Presiding Bishopric. Its purpose is to establish investment policy and strategy and to review key investment decisions.

The Deseret Management Corporation (DMC) is a corporation with its own board of directors. DMC functions as a holding company for most of the commercial businesses owned by the Church. These companies pay all taxes that are paid by commercial corporations. Some properties are also held for reasons other than investment. In addition to protecting the surroundings of sacred properties, such investments may be maintained to support the ecclesiastical efforts of the Church.

 

So we have:

• The Council on the Disposition of Tithes,
• The Budget Committee,
• The Appropriations Committee, T
• The Church Budget Office,
• The Finance and Records Department,
• The Auditing Department,
• The Audit Committee,
• The Investment Policy Committee,
• The Deseret Management Corporation and its board of directors,
• The First Presidency of the Church,
• The Quorum of Twelve Apostles,
• The Presiding Bishopric,
• "other boards and committees to oversee the management of the Church's investments and reserves," and on and on.

We also have a robust missionary program.  Many of us have served as missionaries.  We know the rules.  We know the lifestyle.  We know the day-to-day operations and schedules and activities of the missionaryes.

We also have meetinghouses and temples.  We know they are all paid for.  We know they are all maintained by the Church.  We know how they are used and when and by whom and for what purposes.

We also have educational and humanitarian efforts.  We know lots about BYU, BYU-I, BYU-H, and so on.  We know about the Perpetual Education Fund.  We know about Welfare Square, Humanitarian Square, Bishop Storehouses, Deseret Industries, extensive and various philanthropic and humanitarian efforts, Fast Offerings, and so on.

We also know quite a bit about the Church's for-profit businesses (though not nearly as much as some would like, I think).  We know the Church owns a lot of land.  We know the Church has farms and ranches.  We know the Church invested in City Creek.  We know the Church is a very good steward of its finances (though some feel it should distribute more of its accumulated wealth).

In other words, we can see where a lot of the Church's money is spent.

We also have a generalized knowledge that the General Authorities live very moderate lifestyles, particularly given the huge amounts of money to which they have access.  They aren't in it for the money.  

We also have tens of thousands of bishops and stake presidents and other local leaders who work for free, and who often have ample experience in how the Church operates.  

We also have regular assurances from auditors that the Church is "living within its means."

To wave all this off as merely "a few vagaries" is . . . a bit off.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited April 27, 2022 by smac97

[Kenngo1969]

On 4/25/2022 at 11:07 AM, HappyJackWagon said:

... [A]s a church we have VERY little knowledge about how the church actually functions beyond a few vagaries. ...

 

On 4/27/2022 at 10:11 AM, smac97 said:

... To wave all this off as merely "a few vagaries" is . . . a bit off.

Thanks,

-Smac

Yes, it is.

Dictionary

Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more

va·gar·y

/ˈvāɡərē/

Learn to pronounce

 

noun

plural noun: vagaries

1. an unexpected and inexplicable change in a situation or in someone's behavior.

   "the vagaries of the weather"

    

   Similar: quirk, idiosyncracy, peculiarity, oddity, eccentricity, fluctuation, foible, whim, whimsy, notion, conceit, caprice, fancy, kink

    

[Scott Lloyd]

13 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 

Yes, it is.

Dictionary

Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more

 

va·gar·y

/ˈvāɡərē/

Learn to pronounce

 

noun

plural noun: vagaries

1. an unexpected and inexplicable change in a situation or in someone's behavior.

   "the vagaries of the weather"

    

   Similar: quirk, idiosyncracy, peculiarity, oddity, eccentricity, fluctuation, foible, whim, whimsy, notion, conceit, caprice, fancy, kink

    

HJW might have been intending to use the plural of vaguery, which is a different word altogether than vagary and has a meaning wholly unlike vagary. Vaguery means vagueness or the condition of being vague. Perhaps HJW is saying he has only a vague idea of how the Church functions. Smac has amply demonstrated that if this is true, it is not for lack of information sources. 

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/vaguery#Noun

Edited April 29, 2022 by Scott Lloyd