- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
So, with the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, due to advanced age, it’s interesting to think about the LDS President and resignation. I found this statement from the Pope enlightening:
Quote:In today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the bark of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me. –Pope Benedict XVI
President Monson is 85; 4 months younger than the Pope, and seems bright and capable. However, that can change quickly. It seems that the Church is perpetually led by old people. In the past 50 years, David O. McKay (96), Joseph F. Smith (95), Spencer W. Kimball (90), Ezra Taft Benson (94), and Gordon B. Hinckley (97) all lived into their 90’s… and most of them could no longer lead the church in their last years.
Joseph Smith was 23 years of age when the Book of Mormon went to the printer. Brigham Young was 45 when he led the exodus out of Nauvoo.
I think it is hard for us men to let go of power once we have it. As far as Thomas Monson being so old, it does not bother me. After all, it’s not like he is making life and death decisions like President Obama or the Joint Chiefs. Could the president of the Church resign? I don’t know that he could. Our doctrine is that he’s been given keys, and is the only one on earth with the authority to exercise them all. Would just saying “I don’t want to be prophet anymore” take that mantle away? Doctrinally I think this would be very sticky. Kumahito… I think the office of prophet and president are conflated. You can resign one but not the other. Could members get their heads around this? One day we’ll end up with a president who is (sorry to use this language) a vegetable, wired up to life support for years on end, unable to speak, write or travel. Or he’ll end up like Brezhnev in his latter days… practically dribbling and sleeping all the time. How would he lead us?
It’s our fault for creating gerontocracy.
SamBee wrote:Kumahito… I think the office of prophet and president are conflated. You can resign one but not the other. Could members get their heads around this?
One day we’ll end up with a president who is (sorry to use this language) a vegetable, wired up to life support for years on end, unable to speak, write or travel. Or he’ll end up like Brezhnev in his latter days… practically dribbling and sleeping all the time. How would he lead us?
It’s our fault for creating gerontocracy.
IIRC – Wasn’t that essentially the case with Benson in the last few years of his life. Hickley and Monson ran the show while Benson was incapacitated.
Board members – please correct me if I am wrong but that was my perception of things.
I’ve been disturbed by the glee of some people about this who smell scandal. It says a lot about them. Ratzinger tried to resign years ago, but JPII stopped him. He prefers books to little boys, and it’s sordid some people assume the opposite. Such people think he is a Nazi because he was in the Hitler Youth… it was compulsory for all. His views on gays though, that’s another matter.
SamBee wrote:Kumahito… I think the office of prophet and president are conflated. You can resign one but not the other. Could members get their heads around this?
One day we’ll end up with a president who is (sorry to use this language) a vegetable, wired up to life support for years on end, unable to speak, write or travel. Or he’ll end up like Brezhnev in his latter days… practically dribbling and sleeping all the time. How would he lead us?.
Don’t we already have a President who is almost a “vegetable”? When you Google Monson and alzheimers/dementia etc.. quite a bit of stuff pops up.
Regardless if Monson has dementia or not, it really does not matter to me. Monson is still capable of lowering missions ages and what not.
I have to say that Pres Monson looks far healthier to me than Benedict. Benedict has taken at least two strokes. Our president doesn’t show Brezhnev type failings. Yet. TSM is in rude health for a man of his age.
Since I was inactive for a long while I do NOT remember GBH’S later years. I don’t even remember him dying. I have seen bits and pieces after the fact and he does look frail. It is only a matter of time til we get through the hundred mark.
No. Mr. Packer is the next in line. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
I would rather keep president Monson than see him retire, isn’t BKP up next? Not sure I want to go there. Canucknuckle wrote:SamBee wrote:Kumahito… I think the office of prophet and president are conflated. You can resign one but not the other. Could members get their heads around this?
One day we’ll end up with a president who is (sorry to use this language) a vegetable, wired up to life support for years on end, unable to speak, write or travel. Or he’ll end up like Brezhnev in his latter days… practically dribbling and sleeping all the time. How would he lead us?
It’s our fault for creating gerontocracy.
IIRC – Wasn’t that essentially the case with Benson in the last few years of his life. Hickley and Monson ran the show while Benson was incapacitated.
Board members – please correct me if I am wrong but that was my perception of things.
Well if I remember right. 2 years before he died(Benson), the prophet leadership role(rights, acting power), was handed down through the paperwork by the lawyers. Even though Benson was still presented as acting prophet.
It’s a imagine thing. Nearly all corporations do what they must to preserve their imagine. It’s definitely not a unique thing to do. Very common.
This one is a tricky question because like most all corporations of any real size it is lead by multiple people. Just as the president of the USA died it wouldn’t really change a ton because the whole cabinet runs it. The figure head is a symbol with the biggest role , but the function of role is more symbol then the role of executive decisions. But I’m not really interested looking to someone for leadership, inside or outside the church. But I understand some people do and do need it.
That idea gives me nightmares…. the one GA I have an issue with… I’m not really thinking of it in terms of whether TSM should resign immediately, thus making BKP the next man up, but rather, if we could get to a point where the any LDS President could resign due to age. TSM seems fine to me, at present, but what if he does live to be 100? At some point, you would think the church would be better off having a younger man in there. I know that the church’s position is that it doesn’t matter, because the FP is the governing body, and as long as someone is in the FP that is capable, then that’s all that’s needed.. for example… when GBP was the third counselor to the incapacitated SWKimball, MGRomney, and NETanner. It just seems to me that Pope Benedict XVI is resigning because he recognizes that at his age and with his declining strength, that the Catholic Church would be in better shape with another holding that office, and I think the same would be true in the LDS church when the President reaches a certain stage in life.
On Own Now wrote:I’m not really thinking of it in terms of whether TSM should resign immediately, thus making BKP the next man up, but rather, if we could get to a point where the any LDS President could resign due to age. TSM seems fine to me, at present, but what if he does live to be 100? At some point, you would think the church would be better off having a younger man in there.
I know that the church’s position is that it doesn’t matter, because the FP is the governing body, and as long as someone is in the FP that is capable, then that’s all that’s needed.. for example… when GBP was the third counselor to the incapacitated SWKimball, MGRomney, and NETanner. It just seems to me that Pope Benedict XVI is resigning because he recognizes that at his age and with his declining strength, that the Catholic Church would be in better shape with another holding that office, and I think the same would be true in the LDS church when the President reaches a certain stage in life.
Do that and you’ll quickly see how many people hopelessly cling to an idea of changeless or timeless system. It would pass in time and become as normal but many people treasure stability and assurance. It would scare those.
Because I just try to do my best in my life. It doesn’t matter much the way I see things. I will continue to do my best no matter who is leader. To me it’s not about standing on my own 2 feet and doing what I can regardless of who is in charge anywhere in any position in the world. People come and go, so does leadership. But it’s a scary thought for some though. I can understand that.
Pope Benedict XVI has looked increasingly tired to me over the past few years. I think a church needs to be led by those with the constitution to handle it. There has been a little controversy surrounding Cardinal Ratzinger due to his youth in Germany during the Nazi regime, but I’m sure there isn’t any kind of scandal associated with this decision. Now, whether that has any relevance for us as Mormons–we do have emeritus seventies now. Why not emeritus apostles? Perhaps we rely so much on the hand of the Lord taking those he does not wish to be prophet, but that seems inelegant in a way. I don’t know what the best solution is.
I would be most comfortable if something like an age restriction came as a bona fide revelation, rather than a policy change.
[edited by me for tastefulness]
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.