Yesterday in Institute, we were talking about the premortal existence, and the nature of intellegience. We talked about everything from eternal natures to foreordination to Mozart. It’s a heavy topic on the best of days, and I’ll admit to a niggling feeling all throughout the lesson. I tried to contain myself, but clearly not enough, because when we got to a quote about how Mozart was placed in his home because he was a musical genius before, and that where we are placed on earth is a reflection of how righteous we were in the previous life, I just couldn’t help it.
“I have a big, BIG problem with that quote”, I burst out.
The teacher handled my vehemence well, and maintained composure, but did gently point out that we were talking about words from a prophet (Harold B. Lee) and an apostle (Bruce R. McConkie). I just said, “Well, I have my own issues with Bruce R. McConkie, but that’s another discussion. But doesn’t anybody else have issues with this idea?”
The class rallied to the cause, and we had a good discussion, and the teacher, like I said, took it all in stride and was even able to joke about payback. I’ve just been called as the Gospel Doctrine teacher, and the Institute teacher assured me, with a wink, that he’ll be speaking up the next time I have to teach.
But I went home and called my husband to discuss how I was feeling, trying to pick apart why I was so disturbed. And I realized that one of the reasons I was so bothered is that we WERE talking about words of the prophets. And, my own issues with Bruce R. aside, it would be hubris of the highest caliber to assume that I know more than a man ordained to be an apostle of the Lord.
I don’t like disagreeing with our leaders. I’ve sustained them, I honor them, and I know they are inspired men. But I can’t pretend that I’ve been comfortable with every word that has ever been spoken over the pulpit. And that, in turn, also makes me uncomfortable.
What do you do when you read or hear something from a leader that makes you uncomfortable? How do reconcile yourself to things that seem to rub you the wrong way while still sustaining our leaders?
I would ask that in your response, please remain respectful of our prophets and apostles.
Related posts:
Tags: faith, General Conference, mormon beliefs, pride, prophetic counsel
[...] Come tell me how you handled it, over at Segullah. [...]
When I have issues with a quote or a statement from an authority, then I go home and try to understand it better. I might research the original context or try to see if it really says what the teacher purported it to say.
For example, the quote you refer to above does not really say that “Mozart was placed in his home because he was a musical genius before, and that where we are placed on earth is a reflection of how righteous we were in the previous life,” — the text of the talk is here: http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=b9ef3219c786b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD
The specific quote says this: “And hence comes the doctrine of foreordination. When we come into mortality, we bring the talents, capacities, and abilities acquired by obedience to law in our prior existence. Mozart composed and published sonatas when but eight years of age because he was born with musical talent. Melchizedek came into this world with such faith and spiritual capacity that “when a child he feared God, and stopped the mouths of lions, and quenched the violence of fire.” (JST, Gen. 14:26.) Cain, on the other hand, like Lucifer, was a liar from the beginning and was told in this life: “… thou shalt be called Perdition; for thou wast also before the world.” (Moses 5:24.)
Now this is the doctrine of foreordination; this is the doctrine of election. This is the reason why the Lord has a chosen and favored and peculiar people on earth; and this is the reason he said: “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me”
We are not placed where we are based on our righteousness, according to that quote (though I am sure God, in his wisdom, places us where-ever He believes we can be of the most influence for good), but we DO bring with us certain talents and traits with us that were developed before we came to earth.
Like you, I DO have a problem with people believing that they are more righteous than another person simply because they are born into a certain family or country or grew up with the Church rather than were converted to it. But I don’t think that belief is supported by Bruce R. McConkie.
Prophets and apostles are, at their core, still just men, and not everything they say, therefore, is gospel truth. There are definitely times when they are speaking prophetically, but sometimes they are just speaking based on what they believe. They are also entitled to their own opinions, just as I am to mine. My husband, while always the ranking priesthood leader in our home, is not always acting as “The Priesthood Leader” — most of the time he’s just Ryan, and Ryan can say and do silly and/or stupid things. Bruce McConkie was a VERY opinionated man (whether I agree or disagree with his opinions doesn’t matter). I’ve got to believe that there were plenty of times he was speaking as Bruce, and not Elder McConkie.
You don’t give the actual quotes discussed, but when you get to a heavy topic like “where we are placed on earth is a reflection of how righteous we were in the previous life,” I have to sit back and wonder, in what ways does it reflect? Were the most righteous give the hardest lives or the easiest for having already proven themselves (I thought we were supposed to prove ourselves here)? If the hardest trial I’m being required to endure is “will my husband ever finish grad school?,” does that mean I was less righteous, because God isn’t going to push me harder than I have strength to bear? Why didn’t I get to be foreordained to be a MENSA member?
Too many big questions. Interesting to ponder, but headache-inducing.
lol, i remember that the prophet is a man and makes mistakes.
Remember when brigham young said men lived on the moon?
http://en.fairmormon.org/Brigham_Young_and_moonmen
The only time a prophet is infallible is when an official statement comes from the first presidency and is sustained by the quorum of the twelve.
that help?
Handsfullmom- the actual quote makes much more sense. thanks for looking that up.
Sometimes I just have to say “I don’t quite understand it yet” and keep trying to research it through scripture study and prayer and other related prophetic counsel. In fact,I’ve always been bothered by the priesthood being withheld from black men before 1978. It was one of those things I was having to keep trying to understand without really having a conclusive answer. Then I came across this article http://www.ldsgenesisgroup.org/newhowtoreach.html
As far as this discussion, the section entitled “THE SCRIPTURES THAT I SHOW INVESTIGATORS AND STRUGGLING MEMBERS TO DEMONSTRATE LDS DOCTRINE” seems to add a little insight.
Please, please don’t shoot me for using a quote from him, but in this same article Elder Bruce R. McConkie is quoted saying “Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world. We get our truth and light line upon line and precept upon precept (2 Ne. 28:30; Isa. 28:9-10; D&C 98:11-12; 128:21). We have now had added a new flood of intelligence and light on this particular subject, and it erases all the darkness and all the views and all the thoughts of the past. They don’t matter anymore.”
To further quote from the article “Thoughts and ways of life ingrained for decades over the span of many generations don’t disappear overnight, but dissipate over time when the desire to do so and effort to eradicate them are present. We each grow line upon line, precept upon precept, even in the 1800s as we do today. What made a man accept the gospel of Jesus Christ and still maintain slaves? The desire for him to extend all the blessings given to him from God may have required much prayer, growth, experience, and time.”
Maybe the desire to understand different issues comes to us each individually and in our own time. So I hang on to the testimony I have and pray, read and sometimes just give it time, knowing that the Lord will help me understand it all someday.
Along the lines of what Peyton said, the scriptures even tell us that those God loves he chastizes. So those who were most faithful in the premortal realm are probably living in the inner-city or war torn Africa.
When I read some of President Kimball’s books I had a hard time with his limited view of women’s roles. At first it really bothered me but then I put his statements in historical context. Thinking about it that way made me understand his words were for that specific generation. We need to be most familiar with the words of our current prophet, their words are most applicable to us in our day.
Then there are other times I know I just have more learning to do. Sometimes I need to bend and learn from life before I understand a concept. Or sometimes I learn more about the complete concept, like Handsfullmom illustrated.
In the end it is the Holy Ghost that bears witness of truth, my human mind coming to terms with it logically can be a stumbling block. If the spirit testifies to me that it is truth, then I need to revisit the topic with greater humility.
As for the the broader over all question of what do I do when I disagree, well sometimes I pray about it. Sometimes that resolves it. Sometimes it doesn’t. I’ve come to realize that I simply won’t reconcile some things, ever. I just kind of sit with that.
Recently I was really struggling with something–I acted anyway. All the whys became clear to me and I finally had clarity on the issue as I was obedient, but only after I acted. No amount of praying and demanding an answer first, consoled me. It was a pure leap of faith.
Once when I was particularly troubled about something I prayed about it for a long time. I finally got the answer, “You weren’t there. You don’t know.” That was it. It didn’t really resolve the issue, but it was enough.
As for Bruce R., well, I think he was just dead wrong, and it doesn’t bother me much more than to say he was dead wrong. As for HBL, I take that quote in a different light, so it doesn’t bother me.
Thank you HandsFULLMOM, I hope everyone reads your comment. You explained and clarified that quote wonderfully.
No way no how is our placement on earth a reflection on our superiority or lack of in the pre-existence. But, I do believe we chose our own trials, and we had talents that were given to us specifically for us to develop further in this life. I am no Mozart, and I have a strong feeling, I wasn’t in the pre earth life too.
I think when you disagree with the words of an apostle or prophet, it is then time to find the source of the quote, and look at the circumstances and conversation in which the quote was given. Oft times, we assume we know the intent of the quote when we ourselves take just snippets, when in reality, we miss the whole point.
But also remember that prophets and apostles have their own opinions, and we are all individual and are going to have our own beliefs that won’t affect our salvation in the end.
We had an apostle come to our Stake Conference, and for the first time, I saw him in a more casual environment and I saw his “flaws”. But I actually liked that. I saw that as Apostles, they still aren’t perfect and they misspeak and sometimes don’t use the sensitivity in their words that I would like. That doesn’t make them any less of an apostle, nor does it make me any less of a faithful member of the church.
Good discussion.
It’s sometimes hard to differentiate between the man and the prophet, but with the Holy Ghost all things can be made known unto us. Right?
It’s funny that we can assume our church leaders cannot have opinions or beliefs that don’t ally with our own.
When Prop 8 was initially blowing up everybody’s opinion, it was a little more than shocking to me the accusations going back and forth. To me it was obvious that our church HAD to take a stand against gay marriage because it is part of our doctrine that man and woman get married and we aren’t to break the law of chastity. By not saying anything, the church would essentially be giving consent by omission. You can disagree, because this is my reasoning. But I’m glad, personally, that the church was standing for something, and publicly.
I have disagreements with Elder McConkie, too, but only with the things he said prior to Blacks receiving the Priesthood. Now that I know he told everybody to forget about it, I’m feeling a lot more forgiving. I guess I should be studying him since I have disagreements on somethings. It’s just hard to get over the fact that his words allowed for members to take them and prop their own racial tendencies. I know it wasn’t his intention, i just don’t like it.
Prophets and apostle being human is a good reason for us to have sound testimonies in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Jendoop,
“Along the lines of what Peyton said, the scriptures even tell us that those God loves he chastizes. So those who were most faithful in the premortal realm are probably living in the inner-city or war torn Africa.”
But you are assuming that you know what the chastisement of God looks like. We are in no position to say why there is a war in Africa. That God is chastising his people is pretty far-fetched.
Joseph Smith was pretty clear that we do not believe in predestination or predeterminism. Foreordination is an entirely different thing.
We seriously limit the mercy of the atonement if God becomes a guy up in heaven manipulating every step of mortality so that we learn certain lessons. God is not great because he has a micromanaged plan. God is great because the Atonement covers our experience. That is his plan.
Marintha, my statement was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I don’t really know where the most faithful are, and I don’t need to know. Just putting an idea out there.
In general I think we need to expand our vision as to how we interpret the words of the prophets. Not beyond the doctrine, but beyond our modern applications of the doctrine.
Keep in mind that not all people who were righteous in the premortal life get really spiffy great lives on Earth, they are often put into difficult situations. So of course not everyone who has seemingly extra hardships in this life was an unrighteous spirit. It’s more that God would know what situations to put us into because of our righteousness and how we could be most successful in this life.
And I agree with Handsfullmom, when something doesn’t make sense it’s best to go to the original and get the context and figure out what is really being said.
I wonder if perhaps some of us might have had an “opportunity” to choose with whom and in what environment we’d be born and live while here. Perhaps we knew there were talents we’d be able to explore or characteristics that we’d be able to change, expand upon, etc if we were exposed to certain situations. Even in the most difficult of circumstances while growing up, some of us realize that our trials help us progress and grow – “what doesn’t kill us, will make us better.” I can’t imagine a loving Heavenly Father not giving us an opportunity for us to have some say in what we’d like to accomplish while here.
I love what Handsfullmom says about finding context. I have also found that reading the biographies of prophets and apostles helps me, because I see all the ways they wear away their lives in service to the Lord, and it becomes easier for me to sustain them and apply (or at least not get upset) by what they teach that is different from how I perceive things. I was very moved by the biography of Elder McConkie, for instance, and impressed by a lifetime spent in service building the kingdom of God.
Finding the context of the teaching in question, and then placing that teaching within the context of a life, are things that help me when I struggle with something.
I’m also fond of this media release:
The full text is found here.
There’s a great analysis of this statement, by BYU professor Valerie Hudson, here.
I feel that God places us each in whatever circumstances in life are most likely to bring us and those around us back to Him. I don’t think anyone will be able to say to God, “well, if only you had given me THAT life, I would have been faithful.” I agree that, just as whatever we learn here will benefit us in the afterlife, whatever we learned before we came benefits us here. It is all just and merciful, as well.
No one in this life has “perfect knowledge” so it is impossible to speak 100% without flaw or opinion. That given a prophet is the mouthpiece of the Lord while in his tenure, so if there are things I disagree with I tend to think *my* issues will either be resolved in time or my understanding of those issues will. In other words it’s not their problem it is mine.
One more thought to ponder. If we are placed and given challenges according to our righteousness in the pre-exsistence, and those trials or blessings are viewed as and easier life or not……Jesus Christ. Perfect being prior, perfect being in mortality, had probably the worst case scenario of all time. Being perfect offered Him the opportunity to bow below us all yet rise above us all while doing it.
Handsfullmom, that actually isn’t the quote that was used, although it’s interesting to note that McConkie clearly used the example of Mozart more than once. Also, the quote about where we are placed on the earth comes as a “reward” for our premortal actions comes from Harold B. Lee, not Bruce R.
I didn’t specify the quotes, only because I’m not all that interested in a discussion about premortal existence and foreordination–I have to admit I’ve done enough thinking about it the last 2 days that my brain is a little tired. Not that it’s not interesting, of course, I’m just interested in a different aspect of gospel education, ie, how we specifically handle things that either don’t make sense to us, or feel wrong to us.
I’ve had it go both ways for me–when I’ve heard things that I’ve disagreed with, I’ve come around to the concept after some study and prayer, but I’ve also had it witnessed to me that what I’ve heard is false doctrine. It hasn’t happened often–okay, it’s only happened once, but even as it was witnessed to me that my leader wasn’t speaking a gospel truth, it was also made clear that he was still my leader, a good and righteous man, and that he was still worthy of my sustaining him. But still, I’m not pretending that it’s a dangerous road to be on to disagree with our leaders.
Funny timing, Heather. Just last night, when I couldn’t sleep and pulled out the Book of Mormon, I was reading the chapter AFTER Nephi gets his explanation of his father’s dream. He went back to the tent and found Laman and Lemuel arguing about something Lehi had said. And Nephi notes, “For he truly spake man great things unto them, which were hard to understand,save a man should inquire of the Lord.” The thought came to me that when the prophet says something we don’t understand or agree with, it is our responsibility to ask our Father for understanding and enlightenment. And, as has been mentioned in other comments, sometimes, even when we seek understanding, our ‘test’ is to walk in faith.
Ah, Kathryn, that’s the quote that was used (or if it wasn’t, it was something really close to that). I just read your comment, thanks. But again, I’ll refrain from going into a lengthy discussion about my own personal problems with that (mostly because, to be honest, I’m not sure I could articulate them succintly enough to really convey what I’m thinking), and leave the discussion open for a more general focus.
Sorry for starting the unintentional thread-jack! Oops!
Long time reader, first time commenter here! What an intriguing discussion. I have thought about this quite a bit, as well. One of the things that has served as a comfort to me actually came from an earlier discussion here at Segullah (and I apologize ahead of time that I do not remember the commenter or the original post.) Anyway, the point was that developing a testimony can be like piecing together a large puzzle. Sometimes, you pick up a piece and examine it for a while, but just can’t see where it fits. That’s generally ok, because you can set it back on the table and try a different one. Perhaps later, when the puzzle is more complete, that piece will fit. While the original comment was not directed at this specific topic, I think it fits. I guess I feel like I can’t expect to know or understand everything right now. Sometimes I have to content myself with what I do understand, and simply move forward. As a wise seminary teacher once told me, surely just trying to keep my baptismal covenants and loving my neighbor can keep me busy enough!
It must be something in the air right now, Heather. This topic, in a round about way, caused a lot of hubris and hurt among friends yesterday in my world, as well.
First, I do believe in the restored gospel, and I do sustain and love our leaders. I really, honestly do. I also do not believe they claim infallibility, and I can relate that back to Joseph Smith Jr himself, of whom I also have a great testimony of as a prophet. Joseph never, ever professed infallibility or perfection- and was quick to correct people when they assumed such. I see no reason, if done with respect, so assume anything more about our modern leaders.
Of COURSE it’s hubris to assume I have more knowledge than a prophet. But at the same time, this Gospel requires, demands, that we use our own agency, ask for ourselves, and entitles us to personal revelation- for US- not for the church at large. That’s a big deal.
What it means to me is that our apostles are still human beings, and are not immune to the conditions of living in a fallen world. It also means that the Lord gave me agency and a big brain, and it’s my responsibility to work out these pondering questions “with fear and trembling before the Lord.”
In my book, that makes it perfectly okay for me to disagree with BRM, or Brigham Young, or even more recently- Elder Oaks (whom I have always, and still do, loved). As long as I do it respectfully, and with careful attention to my relationship with the Lord.
It’s one of the greatest things about the restored Gospel- that personal relationship we get to have, and our own agency.
I should also add that I do not believe in criticizing a prophet from a dais in the park- a privately held, prayerfully worked out position is one thing- crying that position from the rooftops, if in opposition to a leader, is entirely another.
Great clarification, Tracy, thanks.
As to the actual topic of the post, for me it comes down to whether I believe in the actual, life-saving doctrines and covenants of the gospel. I could go round and round (and have) over things various leaders have said that don’t mesh with my view of God and eternity, but in the end, none of those things change the covenants I have made and the obedience necessary to be exalted.
Our leaders are men. Righteous men, but mortals nonetheless. I don’t believe every word uttered from their mouths is scripture. I do believe they have immense wisdom and knowledge and that God has ordained them to be his servants and mouthpiece. I do believe I should hearken to their words. To hearken is to give respectful attention. It does not mean to accept unequivocally. I will say that I feel the spirit confirming the bulk of what I hear from our leaders. Some of it is more anecdotal (more practice than principle) and I try to extract the principle from those things and determine how to best apply it in my life.
When I find myself questioning a statement or sentiment, I must first give respectful attention by trying to understand context and studying and praying over that thing. Beyond that, answered fully or not, what is it to me? I believe in the First Vision, the Priesthood Restoration, and The Book of Mormon. I believe in the foundational doctrines that will lead me to salvation. Everything else is extracurricular and needn’t sway me from my path.
Now, as to all the Saturday’s Warrior stuff floating around… I still don’t know why it is so important for some people to feel like we chose trials or families or missions or anything else. The requirement is the same, the blessings offered are the same. And, as my husband likes to say, ” Asking us to choose from a menu of mortal trials while never having experienced mortality would be like asking someone to choose foods they had never eaten from a menu in a completely foreign language”. Too true. Hey, spirit person, would like sexual abuse or chronic pain? Um, can you please explain physical pain? Seriously, it’s like trying to describe the taste of salt.
And that’s not even touching on the whole problem of others’ agency being manipulated in order to manufacture our trials.
Anywho, great topic, Heather.
Something I cling to when confronted with “General Authority A said X” is that “General Authority B says Y”. What I mean is that just because Joseph Fielding Smith said such and such about Progression between Kingdoms, James Talmage said the opposite. Just because Elder Nelson came down against evolution, David O. McKay expressed an opinion in favor of it. Just because McConkie came out and said we were predetermined in our talents, he also at other times said we weren’t.
I can’t imagine what it would be like to be a prophet or an apostle and have people hang on my every word. What must it be like to have most of your words recorded and be expected to be %100 correct on everything. That would truly be awful. I for one am willing to allow the brethren a bad day once and a while. They are human.
I enjoyed reading the post and the comments as well. Sunny #28 shared some fascinating thoughts. Thanks, Sunny. I enjoy the opportunity to share our honest concerns and ideas in a safe, respectful place, and I believe Segullah is one of the most respectful places for that.
Although there are many things Elder McConkie taught with which I disagree (blacks=seed of Cain, anti-Christian churches, etc.), he taught many more that are profound and inspiring. His final testimony of the Savior was so heart-felt and so inspiring that few could doubt He did not love Christ.
My husband was a new convert when called to serve as a missionary with Pres. McConkie as mission president. I could write pages about Pres. McConkie’s humility, unconditional love, and example as a father, husband, and servant of God. My husband observed him with his wife, children, and other missionaries. He never sent a missionary home, but quickly forgave and gently taught. He loved and inspired his missionaries is amazing ways–without exercising unrighteous dominion. I wish more was written about Bruce R. McConkie–the man. I think many would be amazed at his unselfishness, his compassion, and his goodness.
Like others have said, I keep the following things in mind:
1. Context; historical time, their calling at the time they said it, where they said it (Conference, fireside, in a book, etc)), audience, the rest of the talk, etc. I find that too often quotes and scriptures are taken out of context and that really bugs me.
2. How ‘core’ is the issue being discussed? Is it essential to my salvation? Many things that are discussed in Conference or other places aren’t essential for our salvation. Like others have mentioned in their comments, a knowledge of the preexistence is good to have and it can increase our understanding of the nature of God, but it isn’t essential for salvation.
3. What exactly bothers me? Sometimes it’s just the language used or the tone in which it was delivered. That happened with a talk in recent conference, but when I went back and read it I felt a lot better about it.
I have also recently read several good biographies of prophets I didn’t understand very well before (David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism, Lengthen Your Stride: The Presidency of Spencer W. Kimball, and Rough Stone Rolling). I honestly can say that I worried a bit about them diminishing my testimony, but I found all of them to be spiritually nourishing. For me, at least, learning more about the prophets of the Church and some of the context of their lives has been valuable.
From the CES document titled “Avoid Teaching Spurious Materials”,
“Doctrinal interpretation is the province of the First Presidency. The Lord has given that stewardship to them by revelation. No teacher has the right to interpret doctrine for the members of the Church” (President Ezra Taft Benson, “The Gospel Teacher and His Message,” address to religious educators, 17 Sept. 1976, 11).
As neat as many people think Bruce R. was, he was not a member of the First Presidency. The institute teacher needs to teach firm doctrine not speculation, even if that speculation comes from an Apostle.
As a side note, I was recently attending Seminary in-service meeting. The instructor asked us to watch a church produced video about the woman at the well. Afterwards the instructor asked what Christ had done. Various answers were given. He then asked what was the first thing that Christ did. My reply was that he asked the woman for a drink of water. The instructor said, “No. Christ was sitting by the well and he got up and moved out of her way. Sometimes we need to move out of our student’s way.” I was shocked to hear that we had movie cameras present when this exchange between Christ and the Samaritan woman took place. After all, no where in scripture is there any description of Christ getting up and moving. I told the instructor that we can read nothing from the stage direction given by a scriptwriter. To make the leap of inferring Christ’s intent from a movie borders on false doctrine.
My children were taught in Seminary that the lost ten tribes are living in space ships and people sometimes see them as UFO’s. That false doctrine was easy to discern. One that was less obvious is that if a person performing an ordinance is not worthy, then the ordinance has no efficacy. Sounds like a bad “I Love Lucy” episode. “Oh, no! I’m not really baptized!” This Seminary teacher continued to teach false doctrine although she was told not to several times.
I think your Institute instructor should have stuck to the manual. Perhaps next time you could ask them to show you in the manual where the doctrine they are teaching is given.
I think that serving in leadership callings has helped me, in a small way, to understand more about how the Church works. There were plenty of times when I did feel the Spirit leading me in what to say, who to call, etc. There were plenty of other times when I definitely made mistakes, called people simply because they were available, etc. I know it’s just a small-scale and that as you receive greater responsibilities you can receive greater assistance, but knowing that I’m always refining my own understanding of things helps me understand that the General Authorities are progressing too in their own spheres.
Heather I’m not sure what your attention was, but it seems as though you just want to discuss disagreeing with our leaders and if it’s okay! The benefit to free agency is that you are free to examine or reflect on the things said by your leaders how ever you want. You are not however free to make general statements about quotes from one leader and then say it is a different leader and then expect others to generalize what they should address. I think your statements were very contrived and that you are searching for affirmation to what you already think.
It’s one thing to have an honest question about church doctrine and to come to other’s for help to understand it. It’s another thing to discuss disagreeing with leaders for the interest in it. I think this problem is much deeper then you are letting on to and that maybe it something you need to discuss with someone you trust who can help you through your doubts.
In our gospel doctrine class this past sunday the lesson was on “following the prophet”. There was a lot of talk about how prophets were infallible or words to that effect. I specifically brought up my disagreements with Elder Mckonkie on a number of issues.
I remember his talk at BYU on ‘The Seven Deadly Heresies”. I found the talk quite interesting as I belived then and belive now in at least 3 or 4 of the heresies he discussed. (Of course so did B.H.Roberts,James E. Talamdge, John A. Widstoe and Henry Eyring Sr. so I felt in pretty good company)
As was mentioned in another comment I also remember his last talk in general conference. It was the greatest testimony of the divinity of Christ I have ever heard or ever expect to hear.
On the specific topic of how our actions in the pre-mortal existence affect oUr “placement ” in this life the actual scriptural evidence is rather thin. The Book of Abraham teaches that the”noble and great ones” were foreordained for a specific mission in this life. That is ALL it says . It does NOT say that all or most individuals are placed in this life based on their actions in the pre mortal existence.
That belief is a folk belief that has developed over the years in the chruch and is expressed in works like “added upon” and “Saturday’s Warrior”
When this topic comes up in class discussion in church and some quote from a general authority is brought up to support the idea that what we did or did not do in the premortal existence shapes where we are placed in this life I always ask “what is the date that this quote was given?” If it is pre 1978 and pre offical declation 2 I point our that this calls it into question. There is a pre Spencer W. Kimball view on how our actions in the pre mortal existence shape our placement in this life and a post Spencer W. Kimball view on this topic. They are NOT the same.
April,
I think you are reading too much into Heather’s post, and her mind! She does not have a hidden agenda.
Foxy J makes good points (as she usually does). I’ve also recently read those books she mentions, and my love for Pres. McKay has grown many-fold since reading his bio.
And even a “harder” book, like Rough Stone Rolling, actually deepened my testimony of Joseph rather than diminished it. It brought his humanity to the forefront, which made all he accomplished that much more amazing and profound- if that’s possible.
Tracy I’ve found the same thing. When I see church leaders as human and all their weaknesses, I see more fully the mercy of God and how he can take us, feeble as we are, and make us instruments in his hands. It makes my testimony deeper and stronger. It is miraculous indeed .
I quite enjoyed how the first related post is listed as “It’s all about poop.”
As a teacher, I absolutely love it when someone makes a comment as Heather did. Those turn into the best lessons, because then people actually become engaged in the topic and express opinions, instead of sleepwalking through the same rote thing over and over again.
One area I faced this problem was as I took religion classes at BYU-Idaho. Sometimes the different teachers would have pet doctrines that would contradict with other teachers, and it really hurt my faith in religious education (not really the gospel, though, I still was completely true). Eventually I realized that we don’t have all knowledge right now, and that we can only make educated guesses about some things. Yet, God has given us the stuff we really need and that is what the church focuses on the most. If there’s just a random quote from a single person on a subject, it probably just isn’t important for us to know right now. I’ve also found that when I focus my thoughts and study on the core doctrines that get the most attention my knowledge and testimony grows much deeper than I ever expected. I think this is why the church works so hard to make sure we’re all on the same page through a standardized lesson plan, the church magazines, and general conference – to keep bringing the focus back to the really important stuff instead of the little details that we sometimes get hung up on, but aren’t really that important.
Katie,
You said it much better than I. Thanks for expressing that.
Sorry I did not mean to sound so judgemental. Heather had no problem saying she disagreed with Bruce R McConkie, but did not want to discuss the thing she had a problem with and then in comment 20 she refered to a quote from Harold B Lee. The title of this post is I disagree with Bruce R McConkie. I’m confused?
Heather, it was very unclear from your post that the quote that concerned you came from Harold B. Lee rather than Bruce R. McConkie; after all, the title of your post was “I disagree with Bruce R. McConkie.”
But be that as it may, it seems probable that the quote by Harold B. Lee in question is this one:
**
“Now then, to make a summary of what I have just read, may I ask each of you again the question, “Who are you?” You are all the sons and daughters of God. Your spirits were created and lived as organized intelligences before the world was. You have been blessed to have a physical body because of your obedience to certain commandments in that premortal state. You are now born into a family to which you have come, into the nations through which you have come, as a reward for the kind of lives you lived before you came here and at a time in the world’s history, as the apostle Paul taught the men of Athens and as the Lord revealed to Moses, determined by the faithfulness of each of those who lived before this world was created.”
**
Once again, if you read it within the context of its entirety (http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=2334d2b9ae76b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD), you’ll find that the sentiment it expresses are balanced by some strong warnings to those who are “called, but not chosen:”
**
“But now there is a warning: Despite that calling which is spoken of in the scriptures as “foreordination,” we have another inspired declaration: “Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. …” (D&C 121:34.)
This suggests that even though we have our free agency here, there are many who were foreordained before the world was, to a greater state than they have prepared themselves for here. Even though they might have been among the noble and great, from among whom the Father declared he would make his chosen leaders, they may fail of that calling here in mortality. Then the Lord poses this question: “… and why are they not chosen?” (D&C 121:34.)
Two answers were given—First, “Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world. …” And second, they “… aspire to the honors of men.” (D&C 121:35.) ”
**
I realize that some of this discussion is tangential, since what you really intended to talk about was not the doctrine you disagree with but what to do with a disagreement, but I think it can be instructional always to look at the source of these quotes and, as others mentioned, discuss them in context of the scriptures, which are the standard works.
If we are to believe the Doctrine and Covenants, then we also know that along with faithful LDS members who have proven themselves worthy, ALL the inhabitants of the “heathen nations” or those without the opportunity to hear the gospel in this life, will have part in the first resurrection and be allowed to live on earth during the Millenium — D&C 45:54: “And then shall the heathen nations be redeemed, and they that knew no law shall have part in the first resurrection; and it shall be tolerable for them.”. Now THAT is an awesome fore-ordination, in my opinion, and I think that is partly what is meant in Revelations when it says that “God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.”
Oh, and Tracy M,
I loved what you said about working these things “with fear and trembling before the Lord”. I think we so often wait to be spoon fed when really the revelation for our lives is there for the taking. If we didn’t have an attitude of needing to be directed in all (or many) things we wouldn’t hang so painfully on every word from our leaders. We should be working on being spiritually self-relient and being able to discern truth, apply it in our lives in the Lord’s way, and then be obedient. I think our leaders are getting less specific about a lot of things and offering “practices” less as the church becomes more global. It is the saving doctrines and ordinances that are universal and need to be taught. The application of those is something we should be spiritually stalwart enough to discern for ourselves.
That was probably really off topic. Sorry. I just really liked Tracy’s comment.
Joseph Smith is chastised by the Lord 24 times in the Doctrine and Covenants – mistakes forever to be remembered in scripture! I take that as a wonderful reminder that even the Prophet isn’t perfect.
Are you sure the quote really was a BRM? I’ve heard that one a ton of times, and every time I’ve tried to track it down, it’s really been some Seventy’s opinion that was given in a fireside somewhere in a foreign country and never one of the Twelve, but it’s usually attributed to someone high up.
And from what I’ve heard, the Brethren many times have tried to come down on that very quote and say that no, it’s false doctrine and to STOP TEACHING it. I’ve been glad, because it’s a sore spot in my own family–it implies a lot that is hurtful for many people. What about converts? That what, they weren’t righteous enough to be born into the Church? Or maybe I was too weak to NOT be born into a non-member family and still make it. Any way you look at it, it’s a lame concept, and I was thrilled to hear it was WRONG.
Not what you were asking, but there’s my take on this particular issue.
#12 “God is not great because he has a micromanaged plan. God is great because the Atonement covers our experience. That is his plan.” Wow! Elder Hafen said something similar a few years back in a Conference talk about the Atonement titled “All For All.” He said, “The atonement allows us to learn from our mistakes without being condemned by them.”
In the early 1900’s there was a First Presidency statement issued in response to Darwin’s idea of evolution and natural selection. In the mid 1900’s, Henry Eyring (President Eyring’s father), an internationally renowned chemist, brother-in-law to President Kimball and a devout member of the church, made a public statement which basically said the first presidency had gotten involved with some fundamentalist religious people who called themselves “creationists” and were very non-scientific. In short, they had been deceived. He felt that ALL knowledge was from God and that to reject any kind of truth is contrary to God’s plan.
I have studied a lot of science and this topic is fascinating to me. And while the church has never issued another official evolution statement, it is interesting to note that evolution is being taught by LDS biology professors at BYU. I guess I’m just reiterating what has been said here: every statement from the brethren is not automatically added to the standard works. We must rely on the Holy Ghost and a lot of faith.
April-
To reiterate, and perhaps to clarify:
There were two quotes presented in class. One was from Harold B Lee, which suggested that we are placed on this earth as a “reward” for our premortal actions. (Sorry, Handsfullmom, you picked the wrong quote again.) The second quote was from Bruce R. McConkie, specifically the one that Kathryn P. put up. Both of them rankled me. I specifically honed in on Bruce R. because his was the one that bothered me more.
I am not putting up the quotes for two simple reasons:
1) The doctrine discussed is not what I want to talk about. Premortal existence is interesting and all, but not something that I want to explore at this moment.
2) I don’t have the quotes in front of me, and don’t want to try to paraphrase them, and thus do an injustice to the original quotes by presenting them with my skewed view.
I am not searching for affirmation for what I already think. I’m asking if other people have had similar experiences, and how they handle this experience.
I’m offended that you would accuse me of being contrived. Angry, almost (although that could just be hunger talking) that you would think that I would share my own personal attempts to reconcile myself with the teachings of our prophets simply as a way of validating or justifying myself. I apologize for perhaps being unclear in my initial explanation of what happened in the class, but believe me when I say that I don’t take disagreeing with the brethren lightly, and that this blog post was my way of learning how other people handle it. I also don’t have to share with you exactly WHAT struggles I’m having, because, parden me, it’s none of your business.
There. Agenda exposed.
And I want to thank all the other commenters who have contributed to what I think is an excellent and respectful discussion. I have been indeed lifted by your faith and steadfastness.
I can’t look up the quote right now, but J. Reuben Clark once said something like you’ll know the leaders of the church are speaking the truth when the spirit tells you that what you’re hearing is true.
That’s the great thing about Mormonism, we get our own confirmations. If something feels totally wrong (like that quote about the preexistence & worthiness), it almost certainly IS wrong, no matter who said it.
I do not believe in criticizing a prophet from a dais in the park- a privately held, prayerfully worked out position is one thing- crying that position from the rooftops, if in opposition to a leader, is entirely another.
Well said.
I also think that sometimes we might even get a different answer, for our own lives. I still think that kind of thing should be kept to oneself.
I also agree with whoever said that it’s often in acting in obedience upon a prophet’s words that I get a confirmation and understanding (for me, that is what happened w/ the gay marriage issue — it was only after YEARS of trusting and acting that some clarity and confidence based on more than just faith really started to come for me.)
Lastly, I think one of the best ways to sort through opinion vs. doctrine is to watch for patterns — patterns between leaders of the same time period, and patterns across time. It’s one of the blessings, imo, of studying the words of past prophets in RS. We can see patterns. Pres. Eyring reminds us that when the words of prophets seem repetitive, it’s then that we should ‘rivet our attention’ — we can know the law of authorized witnesses has come into play.
And from what I’ve heard, the Brethren many times have tried to come down on that very quote and say that no, it’s false doctrine and to STOP TEACHING it.
side note: Might you be thinking about this one? –different quote.
“2) I don’t have the quotes in front of me, and don’t want to try to paraphrase them, and thus do an injustice to the original quotes by presenting them with my skewed view.”
Heather, I understand what you’re saying about not wanting to bog down into a discussion of the original disagreement, but I do have to say that what you wanted to avoid in #2 above is exactly what happened in your original post — your very cursory summary of what you disagreed with WAS an injustice to the original quotes. And though you probably didn’t intend it to, your comments about Bruce R. McConkie (“I disagree with Bruce R. McConkie”, “I have my own issues with Bruce R. McConkie”) are unfair, in my opinion, to a man who gave his whole life in unselfish service and devotion to the Lord’s Church. The conference address where he bore his testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ were given under the most trying, painful, and difficult of circumstances, and I absolutely respect and honor him as an Apostle. I just finished his biography and really enjoyed learning about this great man, tendency to bluntness and all.
I don’t think you have ill motives, but perhaps it would have been better to say that you were uncomfortable with some quotes and leave it at that, with no brief outline in your own words of what the quotes said. After all, as some have mentioned, one of the most common reasons people are unhappy with things the brethren supposedly said is that the quotes are taken out of context or are summarized incorrectly.
I think the discussion here has been really interesting. I really like what Kris said about puzzle pieces and that sometimes we don’t understand something it’s good to just wait until we’ve pieced together more of the puzzle before looking at the piece again.
Handsfullmom-
Fair enough. You’re probably right, that would have been a better approach to the whole thing. I was writing this post while supervising two toddlers in a house that is currently being painted, and (obviously) should have chosen a better time to focus on it. Thanks for your contribution to the discussion. I am amazed at your quote finding skillz
.
Here, I’m afraid I’ll have to disagree with you,too. I don’t think it’s unfair to say that some of the things Elder McConkie has said make me uncomfortable. Perhaps I came off as a little flippant, but I didn’t say Elder McConkie was a bad man, or didn’t serve the Lord with his whole heart, or that I didn’t appreciate his service. I also was moved by his last testimony–it was shown to me in seminary, and I still remember it. I think that’s the crux of the discussion, really. How do we reconcile things we disagree with, or are uncomfortable with, when they come from people who are devoted to Christ, people we respect and admire?
m&m, I love what you said about looking for patterns. Definitely something to think about. Thanks.
1) Prayer. Asking for Heavenly Father’s help and the Holy Ghost’s confirmation is vital. Thanks to the sister who shared the importance of putting it to the test — Alma 32:27.
2) Return to the source. If you can’t document it, if it’s not an AUTHORIZED source (see above official church statements), if it’s not in an official church publication, BE CAREFUL.
3) Watch for multiple AUTHORIZED witnesses, as per President Eyring’s statement. “…in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.” D&C 6:28
4) Beware of legends, myths, and deviations. Many of the mistaken ideas come from stories, and quotes passed along.
.”
As much as we all want to teach doctrine, sometimes we exaggerate or add to concepts or stories to get people’s attention. “I told you a million times not to exaggerate
And sometimes we pass on something we “heard” here or there. Be sure you’ve found the source and that it’s true/relevant, etc.
5) We have so many great, AUTHORIZED resources – the scriptures, the conference talks, True to the Faith, Preach My Gospel, For the Strength of Youth, etc. As we come to know those better, we will have a better standard by which to measure what we “hear.”
6) Remember, too, that “discussions” bring opinions. We need to make sure those opinions are doctrine-based before we change our beliefs, behaviors.
Praying, studying authorized resources… sounds like holding to the rod — the word of God!
Sure, I have problems with things said by our leaders sometimes. But I always come back to the amazing love I feel from my Heavenly Father and I’m able to “shelve” the things I don’t understand/agree with for another time because I trust Him, and I know that someday I’ll be able to understand it all.
Interesting question about why all the “Saturday’s Warrior” stuff is so popular, Sunny. My own take on the growing notion (NOT doctrinal) that we chose all of our trials, etc. is that it makes those who espouse that belief feel more in control of their life experience, more empowered because they “chose” what is happening to them.
Personally, I just think the trials come our way…often by natural means, sometimes from the exercise of our agency and/or the agency of others, and occasionally by design. Perhaps there may have been instances where an especially different and difficult mothering role or calling was going to fall to us and we were forewarned as a means of preparation. This isn’t to say that I don’t believe we all have a very specific plan for our lives, I’m just not sure we were as involved in the details as we might like to think.
The truth is that it doesn’t matter anyway. It’s what we do about these things now that counts, and if feeling we signed on beforehand helps us get through them, I can’t see that it does much harm…as long as we don’t present it as doctrine.
As for the being born into a certain life situation because we were righteous in the pre-existence, this doesn’t need to be a black and white issue either. There may be situations where a certain person was sent to a home or family because of positive characteristics manifested in the pre-existence. Why not? And it wouldn’t necessarily be a good situation, either. I should think stronger spirits might be considered capable of handling more difficult trials. So it wouldn’t necessarily be a reward kind of thing…
And in a different vein entirely, good comment about “patterns” m & m!
I pray about it!
For every statement uttered by a church leader, there are two actual messages:
1) what the leader actually says
2) what the Spirit says as an accompaniment to testify of that statement
When we choose to take offense, we never make it to number two (and I know, because I’ve been there!).
Heather, thanks for responding so well to my last comment. After I hit submit, I worried I had been too harsh in my wording. I appreciate you took it in the spirit it was intended and did not take offense.
No worries, handsfullmom. It was a good comment.
I like what Elder Scott said in this last General Conference about his reaction to an *ahem* less than appropriate lesson at church. He said,
“I asked in prayer, ‘is there more I should know?’” And the spirit gave him the answers.
I personally have some Bruce R. McConkie problems. Interestingly, in my current religion class, we just read an article by my professor about Jesus’ teachings about the Law of Moses, where he spent some time refuting, or at least presenting an alternate viewpoint to, several of Elder McConkie’s statements. I think this shows that even though Elder McConkie was an apostle, he wasn’t a scholar of Judaism; he made assumptions and jumped to conclusions that weren’t necessarily correct. I think we frequently assume that most of the words prophets and apostles say are inspired and true; however, every word a prophet utters is not a prophecy, necessarily.
Of course, the hard part is knowing when to draw the line, but I think a lot of that can be resolved by relying on the spirit, like Elder Scott/TheMuffinMom said.
Probably a lot of this has already been said and I just didn’t read all the comments–sorry!
Wow, I so needed to hear this discussion right now; this has helped me work out something of my own that I have been wrestling with. Thanks to everyone for their comments here and especially to Heather for bravely posing this question in the first place. I think we all have questions rolling around in our brains and could use a respectful and thoughtful discussion to work it out, but often it’s hard to feel comfortable talking about it with others lest we be judged or misinterpreted. I appreciate that the forum exists here because some of us don’t always have that opportunity in our respective wards.
I just wanted to say thanks for this post. As his birthday present, my dad asked me to read his favorite church text: Bruce R’s “Millenial Messiah.” While there is a lot of good stuff, there are some things that rub me the wrong way and don’t reconcile with what is being currently taught, and this discussion has been really helpful in knowing how to negotiate it.
Now I just have to negotiate how to respond to my dad’s question of “what did you think?”
But in response to the post, when I disagree, I tend to give myself a day or two to cool down (because I know I can get worked up), then approach the quote again in its larger context. I try to give the speaker the benefit of the doubt and figure out why they would say what they said. Then I compare it with what our current leadership is saying and see if it meshes. And if none of those things work, I pray like crazy to know God’s will, and try to be as patient as possible.
Good luck!
For every statement uttered by a church leader, there are two actual messages:
1) what the leader actually says
2) what the Spirit says as an accompaniment to testify of that statement
I actually think sometimes there are three.
1) What we *think* they said (any knee-jerk, emotional response, imo, is something we need to take a step back from, because the reactive approach will so often just be wrong)
2) What was *actually* said (the words and overall message)
3) What the Spirit guides us to focus on.
A few other thoughts I have had:
-I think that it is essential for us to remember that no talk is given in a vacuum…the big picture is ours to keep in mind as we listen. I think so often, misunderstandings and frustrations can come when expecting one speaker, one talk, one article, to cover it all. And/or missing the big picture of the talk by focusing on one phrase or sentence. This has happened recently with Elder Oaks and Elder Hafen and Elder Holland, imo. I want to say –”Listen to what they are actually saying on the whole — don’t get caught up in one word or phrase!”
- If prophets are not infallible, what about us? I think we need to possibly be more wary of our own weakness in criticizing them as in their alleged weakness in teaching us. We are as human as they are, w/o the authority that they have. Again, too, the law of authorized witnesses is a great protection for us, and to me inspires great confidence.
- To me, true personal revelation that may differ from the prophets should, in general, stay personal. Our revelation doesn’t apply to anyone else, nor does it give us license to invalidate what they have said for others.
-One last thought about what I love about prophets’ words, and something that helps me recognize truth, too, is how many layers even the seemingly-simple talks can have. When I have ears to hear and eyes to see, the repetition of the basics becomes like an onion, and has sometimes led to (or validated) some amazing ahas about life, the gospel, the temple, etc.
-One last thought, also from Pres. Eyring…is to not reject something that we may not like at first blush. He talked of prophetic counsel being like sand that has gold flakes in it…if we hold onto it for a while, we might just find gold. I think sometimes some patience with their words can allow us to sift through things … sometimes things just take time to distill.
Erin, our comments crossed.
Okay – so I’m not sure anyone will read what I have to say since I’m getting to it so late in the game…
Here’s what I think:
1)I believe, as do many other commenters, that a quote needs to be taken in context. If taken out of context, misunderstanding could occur.
2)Thoughtful study and prayer is vital in my path to understanding what that church leader meant to convey. Personal revelation is an important part of our lives as members of this church and is one of the things that set us apart from other churches. I know the Lord will help me to decipher what is said over the pulpit as prophetic or natural man.
3)And finally, I always try to remember that my testimony is of the Savior, not the men who lead His church.
So many people have had such good things to say. I guess I just want to add this: I can point back to a few, poignant and powerful experiences when I knew without a doubt that God loved me and Jesus taught the truth. And when I’m wrestling with something, I really try to hold onto those. “The church” after all, is just a bunch of folks helping us all try to get to that understanding more deeply and more often. I imagine it’s even possible for people to get there in different ways. But certainly none of us gets there without a mistake or two along the way.
Sometimes I get tired of waiting for that perfect understanding – the completed puzzle – of how it all fits together, but I’m confident it will come and that when, and if, we one day find out that certain people were wrong about certain things, we will all have enough charity in our hearts to get that they were just doing the best they could with the understanding they had too.
Until then, as someone above said, I guess it’s hard enough to focus on the basics.
Erin (68)
A few months back I sent a study document to the First Presidency concerning false doctrine taught in the book Millennial Messiah. You can see a copy of part of that document on http://studiesonzion.com/documents/Are_these_Teachings_in_the_book_The_Millennial_Messiah_Scriptural.pdf
I will send you a copy of the letter if you contact me through the Studiesonzion.com That book contains more false statements than any book written by a church leader. I have challenged his false doctrine on several occasions but the brethren either don’t reply or fob me off.It is an absolute disgrace. Any member who has the Holy Ghost and reads Millennial Messiah will know that many statements in their are false.The scriptures are true. The Doctrine and Covenants is the word of God for this generation. When leaders of the church go beyond these teaching looking beyond the mark they are in error. I had correspondence with Hugh Nibley the great church scholar who agreed with me concerning some of the teachings of Elder McConkie. I still love McConkie for his efforts and numerous other good books like the New Testament commentaries. That you didn’t feel good about Millennial Messiah is to your credit and an indication that you have the spirit.
This is an interesting post. Of course, we all face times when our personal beliefs are challenged by something a past (or current) apostle or prophet did or said.
I think that this is why it is so important to have the Spirit in our Lives. We can trust that the Spirit will bear witness of the truth to us. Even if we don’t fully understand the doctrine that we question, I know that the Spirit will help us to feel comforted and peaceful.
Anyways – thanks for the post. The comments have been so interesting.
Oh…I was so nervous about this post! I read it on my google reader and immediately thought, “Why are they blogging about this? Comments could get out of hand so quickly.” And yet, instead of feeling defensive and judgmental, I am impressed by the thoughtfulness of the comments in response.
Great thoughts.
M&M,
I liked your comment from Pres. Eyring about not hastily rejecting teachings too quickly. He may have been re-emphasizing the following earlier teaching from George Q. Cannon:
“If we hear any principle taught from the stand that we do not understand, let us seek to comprehend it by the Spirit of God. If it be not of God, we have the privilege of knowing it. We are not required to receive for doctrine everything that we hear. We may say, “I do not know whether this is true or not; I will not fight it, neither will I endorse it, but I will seek knowledge from God, for that is my privilege, and I will never rest satisfied until I have obtained the light I require.”
If you hear a doctrine that does not agree with your feelings or that you do not believe, take this course; do not reject nor endorse hastily without knowing or understanding. By taking this course you will develop the principle that God designs we should possess, and we will thus become a wise and understanding people, for we will be based on the rock of revelation. (Apr. 21, 1867, JD 12:46)
George Q. Cannon, Gospel Truth, p. 270
Heather, “I also don’t have to share with you exactly WHAT struggles I’m having, because, parden me, it’s none of your business.”
I did not want to know what struggles you were having. I suggested you find someone you trust to talk to them about it. It’s harsh to name names with out background to support your ideas. I’m sorry you were offended by my opinion.
I have to admit, in this situation it just rolls off my back. I think he’s wrong on this one, it’s not core, and I move ahead.
I don’t really see it as setting myself above an apostle–though I’m sure that’s what other people would say. I do have to say, I am a child of God too, and the gospel has to make sense to me.
It’s especially easy for me to dismiss theological ideas that don’t directly relate to behavior. Past statement I don’t agree with have the potential to get me really emotionally upset. Yet I notice: How upset do I get about the state of my year supply of food? The amount of debt I carry? The consistency of how I teach FHE? And less measurable counsel to love my neighbors, my family, my country? In those situations, I think a loving Father would have me move past upset and do something. This one has no do, so I can simply move past.
Lucy–
I, too, am impressed with our readers and the thoughtful and insightful comments that have been offered. Everybody has been very helpful while still maintaining a respectful atmosphere. You’re right—the comments could have gotten out of hand, and they haven’t, for which I’m grateful. I want to thank everybody for that. Segullah has a good bunch of readers!
m&m, I especially liked what you said about knee-jerk reactions. I remember feeling upset with a speaker once in SM meeting. My husband gently reminded me that perhaps it was because I was angry about other things that made me focus on something that, in my husband’s opinion, wasn’t out of line at all. He was, of course, absolutely correct. So often we are dealing with hard things in our lives that sometimes we project things onto what others are trying to tell us, letting our own circumstances cloud things. I’m not sure how to deal with that, or how to avoid it, but certainly being aware of it can lessen the potential confusion if a person is willing to take a step back and re-evaluate things in a different emotional and mental state.
On the core point, read _Talent is Overrated_
It is a great book.
On the other core point How do we reconcile things we disagree with, or are uncomfortable with, when they come from people who are devoted to Christ, people we respect and admire? it should be a humbling lesson to each of us as to what we might think or say that would strike others the same way.
So often we are dealing with hard things in our lives that sometimes we project things onto what others are trying to tell us, letting our own circumstances cloud things.
So well said, Heather. It’s hard hard hard to deal with, too. For me, time has been the best ally in that process. Whenever I have been MAD about something, and have given myself time to cool off, I am able to go back to the words or ideas with fresh eyes and a more open heart.
I have to do that with my OWN thoughts and the voices in my head, too. Or with what happens in relationships or situations around me. Or in my family roles. Or in my callings. Or when I blog. Or….
I have especially appreciated Kathryn’s and M&M’s comments on this topic. Personal discipleship is such a private, sacred thing. I believe that when we look for light–we find it. When we look for something to feed our doubts–we find that, too.
Sure I’ve wondered about some things I’ve read or heard, but it doesn’t rattle my belief in Heavenly Father’s love. I know He will reveal all things I need to know when I need to know them. As for the rest of the “stuff”, who cares?
We need to be careful of what motivates our search. Are we more concerned that our views be unique and intellectual or that our comments win followers? Or are we more private with the direction we seek. I’ll admit that I’m as guilty as anyone in trying to come up with something spectacular to say before I raise my hand in gospel doctrine, or give a talk, or give a prayer. I guess what life is really about is getting back to the simple, clear Primary doctrine. We are children of God. He loves us and wants us to find our way back home. What else really matters?
I can hardly read or sing that last verse of “I Believe in Christ” without choking up.
I can’t even get through the first verse, m&m. That song is powerful.
=)
One thing that has been mentioned over and over again is that the prophet and apostles are imperfect men. But it seems to me that too often we forget that we too are just as imperfect and fallible, if not more so.
Personally, I feel more inclined to trust the thoughts and wisdom of an apostle who has lived several decades to my 32 years, who has studied the gospel far more intensely than my haphazard and infrequent studies have been than my own imperfect observations and opinions.
I’ve thought a lot about the way the story of Abraham being commanded to sacrifice his son, Isaac, applies to this discussion. Abraham only received understanding and resolution once he actually committed to doing what he was commanded. So I truly believe the only way we can reconcile differences of opinion are through sincere prayer, devoted study, and, if it involves principle or doctrine, actually applying it.
Kathryn, I’m not really sure how to respond to that.
Okay, I’ve thought about it some more. And here is my response.
I think that sometimes there is a certain ethos in mormonism that says that if you disagree with the leaders, or challenge them, then you are edgy, thoughtful, intelligent, and cooler than the people who accept the prophet’s words like blind sheep. I don’t subscribe to this, and think it is rather dangerous, even, just because it’s not a big leap from challenging the leaders to challenging the doctrine in general. At that point, it’s easy to be caught up in a toxic mix of pride and hardheartedness that truth and light can not penetrate. Perhaps that’s when you pick up the stone.
I am not advocating picking up the stone.
Again, I apologize if I wasn’t clear in my original post that I wasn’t talking about outright challenges to our apostles. Nor have I said anywhere that I think I am smarter than Bruce R. McConkie, or more spiritual, or better informed about the kingdom. All I have said is that sometimes, things bother me.
And I have to say that in my humble opinion, “bothered” is quite a fair distance from cyberstoning.
I’ve been edified by the comments here that show that I’m not unique. I think that a person can be bothered when a leader speaks for a variety of reasons, and it doesn’t lessen the respect for a leader, or even the truth of the leader’s statement. It just means that the listener needs to make a decision—does this bother me enough to stay or to go? And since I’ve made the commitment to stay in the church, it means that I have to make some more choices—do I dismiss the teaching as false doctrine, or do I not? Since I’d say that it’s probably not healthy to routinely dismiss the words of the prophets as false doctrine, another choice has to be made—how am I going to reconcile myself with being bothered but still wanting to be a member of this church?
Which is where this post came from.
Heather,
Your post was fine. There is a difference between seeking to find fault and genuinely not understanding or agreeing with something. There is also a difference between looking for an excuse to distance yourself and looking for a way to reconcile your beliefs. Some people may never question. Maybe that is a blessing. For others, the questioning drives them to their knees and leads to a divine lesson in personal revelation or faith.
I think an honest searching such as yours offers hope for others (many, many others) who have also questioned. Yours is a question of how to align yourself with God, follow the prophets, and discern for yourself. In a day when even the very elect will be deceived, how valuable it is to learn to be guided by the spirit in spiritual matters. I think it is what the Lord and his prophets would have us do. We must each know the voice of the Lord. That is how we will recognize truth when it is taught.
You did nothing wrong. Thank you for your honesty.
PS
So as not to be misunderstood, the “very elect” comment was not directed toward our leaders. It was meant to point out that any of us can be misled without being familiar with the spirit’s way of teaching us individually.
Interesting posts. Whatever Church leaders say or teach, I think it’s incumbent upon the audience to have the Spirit with us in order to understand how these teachings are germane to each of us individually. Certainly if one has the Spirit with him/her, he/she will have the confidence to know how to interpret any teachings or sayings in his/her life. It seems that some of you who are posting are just a bit too defensive about the honesty in expressing disagreements.
I absolutely have disagreements with Elder McConkie, and I refuse to accept the notion that though I have disagreements or even criticisms of him, that somehow I’m incapable of acknowledging or appreciating his service, sacrifice, or office as an Apostle. I adore the Prophet Joseph Smith, but I’d tell him to his face he didn’t handle polygamy well, particularly with Emma! And we don’t need to go into his lack of business acumen!
Elder McConkie did a great work for the Church, not only in the normal duties an Apostle performs and their life sacrifice, but in encouraging scripture study and being part of the LDS version of the Standard Works. However, there’s no denying his abrasive style, with his “beat em up” talks from the pulpit (and yes, I have heard EVERY ONE given at BYU since my husband is a huge McConkie fan and bought and memorized them all) that as a convert, I’m grateful I didn’t hear them until after I was married.
It’s a great question, how to reconcile a disagreement with a Church leader, especially an Apostle or Prophet. Just like I really don’t believe people when they claim a couple married 50 years never fought, I simply don’t believe that a mature LDS member has NEVER in their mind disagreed with a Church leader. I just don’t believe it. I don’t think it’s arrogant or stone-throwing to admit to a disagreement. It becomes a problem to nurture a disagreement to his own self-destruction, and it’s also a problem to be so disingenuous that one can’t bear the existence of honest disagreements with Church leaders that one is paradoxically compelled to be un-Christ-like in his attacks.
I’ve been thinking about this post a lot this week. There were a few quotes used in the Institute lesson we had this week that I just flat out told the teacher that I know it was a prophet that said it but I didn’t like it. Really threw the teacher for a loop and she was flustered the whole rest of the class. Which wasn’t my intent. I’d wanted to discuss the quote and my concerns with it, and since there were only three people in the class it would’ve been possible. But the teacher wasn’t prepared for that.
So what am I doing? I’m looking up the background and context of the quotes and figuring out the whole story behind them. And I’m talking about it a LOT with my fiancé. They were quotes about the differences between men and women. And then if it still doesn’t sit right, I’ll pray for an understanding of it.
do I dismiss the teaching as false doctrine, or do I not?
I think this is something people sometimes struggle with, but I wonder if sometimes the problem is in making it a binary like that. Might it be worth asking, “Is this even worth the time and energy to sort through?” Maybe sometimes it’s good just to let it go and not worry about it. I think we can not only pray to know if something is true doctrine or not, but also to know if it’s even significant enough to be worrying about.
I’m NOT trying to minimize the questions that do sometimes come up, and I’m not saying God doesn’t care about them, but I do think at some level we also have a responsibility to seek for discernment about where to put our limited time and energies.
An analogy that comes to mind — Elder Scott once talked about how a pebble held up close can take over our line of vision and seem like a boulder, but when thrown on the ground, it is seen in perspective as the small rock is really is. Sometimes what we think are big deals may really be small boulders. The weightier matters are those, imo, that are given to us plainly, repeatedly, in holy writ and by latter-day prophets. And they could take a lifetime to really understand deeply. I tend to think that sometimes, a statement here or a comment there that may raise eyebrows can actually end up being distractions from the core, simple-yet-profound (and sweet!) doctrines of the plan of salvation.
m&m, I think I’m in love with you.
Amen, m&m!
I think, as teachers we also have a responsibility to present accurate, authorized and appropriate materials in Holy Ghost-guided lessons.
Found this yesterday in Elder Scott’s recent Conference talk — reminded me of the importance of not being the “devil’s advocate,” or stirring up contention, or even being showy in class.
Those who come to church classes come to be edified and taught, not upset or confused — we should teach as if an investigator or new convert was in the room (we never know when they may be!).
As we seek the Spirit, we can be guided in our preparation — using Elder Scott’s guidelines for personal revelation will help!
And as those who attend the classes come prayerfully prepared, all will indeed be edified of all!
The awesome blessing Elder Scott speaks of indirectly is that, no matter the teacher or lesson, we can receive messages we need if we are prayerfully and humbly seeking and listening
Elder Richard G. Scott:
“One Sunday I attended the priesthood meeting of a Spanish branch in Mexico City. I vividly recall how a humble Mexican priesthood leader struggled to communicate the truths of the gospel in his lesson material. I noted the intense desire he had to share those principles he strongly valued with his quorum members. He recognized that they were of great worth to the brethren present. In his manner, there was an evidence of a pure love of the Savior and love of those he taught.
His sincerity, purity of intent, and love permitted a spiritual strength to envelop the room. I was deeply touched. Then I began to receive personal impressions as an extension of the principles taught by that humble instructor.
Subsequently, I visited the Sunday School class in our ward, where a very well-educated teacher presented his lesson. That experience was in striking contrast to the one enjoyed in the priesthood meeting. It seemed to me that the instructor had purposely chosen obscure references and unusual examples to illustrate the principles of the lesson. I had the distinct impression that this instructor was using the teaching opportunity to impress the class with his vast store of knowledge. At any rate, he certainly did not seem as intent on communicating principles as had the humble priesthood leader.”
Oops forgot this part of Elder Scott’s quote (comes right after what I included above):
“… In that environment, strong impressions began to flow to me again.”
FNF-
Thanks for that quote. I’ve just recently been called as the Gospel Doctrine teacher, and I will definitely keep that excellent quote in mind as I prepare my lessons.
Kathryn P.
That would make sense except that Joseph Smith often went by Joe, and was called Brother Joseph. The same rules we use today to refer to apostles and prophets did not apply then. It was in no way disrespectful.
I really feel like you were being completely unfair to posters when suggesting they were essentially stoning an apostle. Quite to the contrary, this thread has been very overwhelmingly in support of sustaining our leaders, including the ones who on occasion say something that doesn’t feel right.
Why don’t we refer to Sister Beck as “President Beck?” That is her office . . . and the key was turned . . . That’s a digression, though I do wonder. . . .
Kathryn: I’ve pondered whether to post, but your first comment (87) troubled me greatly, and not just because the poster is a dear friend. To attribute sinister motives (to claim virtual stone-throwing) to a sister seeking to honestly grapple, within the kingdom, with a dilemma we ALL grapple with at some point . . . . it felt like shaming. *Tell her* you found the reference to his name sans title jarring, own that discomfort and share it with compassion — that’s how we learn and grow from each other . . . but saying the post had a “bad spirit” akin to evil-doers . . . that can’t be what you intended . . .
Deborah, Relief Society president is an office, but not a priesthood office. The titles of President, Elder, Bishop, are related to priesthood offices.
Playing “devil’s advocate” is never a good idea. But asking an honest heart felt question because you are confused by something is not bad. We all, at some point, are an “investigator” and seeking the truth on a topic. We are told that “if any of ye lack wisdom, let him ask of God.” Imagine if a young Joseph Smith hadn’t thought to question what he was hearing and try to understand it better.
Bringing up an opposing idea just to bring it up is not good. But saying you don’t understand something or don’t know how it fits, is fine. And it’s also perfectly fine for the teacher to say they don’t have the answer and suggest personal prayer and study.
The Deseret News has made a practice in the last couple of years to referring to RS general presidents as, say “President Beck.” I like it. Feels respectful.
Sherri Dew made a point, it seemed, of using this title in her Ensign history of the Relief Society (see here http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=157e94bf3938b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD). Notice how much that seems to honor these extraordinary women. We just don’t seem to use this parlance much as regular Mormons. I wish we would. /End threadjack
Hmmm. . . let’s try that link again:
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=157e94bf3938b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD
Kathryn, thanks for your explanation. I’m still completely blown away that you would compare my original post to stoning the prophet, but I appreciate the opportunity to understand your perspective better.
Would it help to admit that I wrote “Bruce R.” not out of disrespect, but because I was too lazy to type out his entire name again? I mean, seriously, you have to hit the shift key TWICE in one name. Probably not good enough, huh?
Heather O., I feel like I need to speak up a bit here and say that, while I absolutely agreed with the meat of your post (I’m in the middle of a book of talks given by an apostle in the mid-sixties, and oh my there are things that don’t sit well with me), I also agree with Kathryn P. that the tone of it was unsettling/off-putting to me. Perhaps it was just the title, or actually I think it was the title juxtaposed with that sweet, earnest picture of Elder McConkie. All that combined with the fact that my sister married into the family, and I cringed when I pulled up Segullah and saw it there.
Again, I absolutely think we need to talk about how to handle it when we disagree with something an apostle says (and my first comment reflected what I believe was the intent of your post) but still wish to be faithful, active members of the Church, who sustain those very apostles. It just seemed like the initial post title was provocative in a “look at this post, controversy-ahead” sort of way, and that provocativeness came at the expense of some of the respect that I hope for our prophets and apostles.
I trust you, that you didn’t perceive it as disrespectful in that way, or you wouldn’t have posted it. I just thought I might have another go at explaining why some people were offended by it. It’s hard to separate the very real question from the perceived disrespect, even though I am sure it was not intended.
(but you still rock, and I still want to send you virtual hugs, especially if you’re swine-fluing right now–did I remember that right?)
(by the way Heather, we were commenting at the same time, and I didn’t see your response till after I posted this)
Yes, the title was provocative. I admit. You got me. I wanted people to read my post.
But I appreciate your honesty, Emily, and thank you for your perspective too.
Folks, we are past the magic 100 mark, and I’m going to close this post now. I appreciate all of those who have contributed to this discussion, and I apologize to those who were offended.
Good night.