Pres. Monson reduction in work

I think this deserves it’s own thread, so I moved the relevant posts here (and I didn’t lose any! 🙂 ).

When Pres. Benson died after a long period of declining health and not being seen in public the church membership was 9 million. Today it approaching 16 million. That means a large portion of the membership are very used to having a prophet at the helm, speaking in GC and clearly in charge (from that point of view). Pres. Hinckley was an exception to the rule of declining health, and had himself been called into the first presidency (as a third councilor) because of the incapacity of Pres. Kimball and his counselors (Romney and Tanner). Prior to that Pres. McKay also had a long period of being incapacitated. I was not around for McKay, but I do remember Kimball and Benson very well, and though Hunter’s tenure was relatively short he was also not healthy. I think this announcement, which is more open and forthright than I recall in the past, is good because it admits what most of us figure out to be obvious – incapacitated people don’t actually go to meetings and watch GC on television in their apartments (it might be on, but they don’t know it).

Two points:

1. In the past when we had incapacitated presidents (the most recent more than 20 years ago) the church continued to run and the membership saw no difference except for speaking by the FP. We sometimes use the term Q15 here, and in reality that’s an appropriate term for how it works – the church is not ruled by a dictator who speaks to God on his own, rather it is ruled by committee and any revelation is received collectively.

2. I think the “follow the prophet” rhetoric has ramped up over this 20 year period, and this idea that the prophet might not be really doing the work might shake some. As I said, I appreciate this announcement but I think we still will hear “Pres. Monson was consulted about this decision” whether or not he actually was able to comprehend what he was being consulted about. There are those who will believe that God in some miraculous way helps Pres. Monson to be lucid during those consultations or advisement and I believe that could happen but likely doesn’t. I think this will be an interesting period of adjustment for some.

I don’t agree with our approach to succession in the presidency. These guys get really really old and unable to function, yet we saddle them with all the responsibilities of running a company with 16 million employees (I’m being tongue in cheek there) right until they pass away. I wish there was a way of letting them leave the presidency voluntarily so THEN, the succession in the presidency can take over to determine who is next.

It’s also not fair to the membership to have a prophet at the helm who purportedly speaks for God, and never get to see him in conference, or when he does speak, to see him stammering and stumbling and needing people to prop him up on satellite television. It’s sad….

I have actually often wondered what the presidency really does all day.

http://www.straferight.com/photopost/data/594/gf_07.jpg

You have to admit there’s an almost unnerving resemblance.

Who is the first counselor now == Eyring? So, is he the equivalent of GBH who ran the church years in his president’s incapacity?

I don’t agree with our approach to succession in the presidency. These guys get really really old and unable to function, yet we saddle them with all the responsibilities of running a company with 16 million employees (I’m being tongue in cheek there) right until they pass away. I wish there was a way of letting them leave the presidency voluntarily so THEN, the succession in the presidency can take over to determine who is next.

It’s also not fair to the membership to have a prophet at the helm who purportedly speaks for God, and never get to see him in conference, or when he does speak, to see him stammering and stumbling and needing people to prop him up on satellite television. It’s sad….

There is a simple pragmatic reason for it – it stops infighting, quarrels and schisms within the leadership to a large degree. I think the church receieved a body blow when Joseph Smith died and numerous claimants came forward… also by doing it this way, the onus is partly put onto God/natural causes rather than human decision.

I would have no problem if Pres. Eyring amd Pres. Uchtdorf were the primary administrators for long enough that some of the other top apostle passed away before Pres. Monsoon. I would like that a lot.

I actually like Elder Oaks as a future President, but some of the others . . . not so much.

Interesting thought in bold there Curt. I hadn’t thought of that. Keep the less desireable GA’s out of the prophet chair while Eyring and Uchdorft captain the ship.

As far as Oaks goes, he’s a mixed bag. I quote some of his ideas on exceptions for individuals to gospel commandments, but then he comes out with stuff like “we need 3rd and 4th generation Mormons to be leaders”, or “you can have inspiration all you want but it can’t conflict with the priesthood line”. Stuff like that. He even did a thing on divorce that made it sound like it’s all your fault if you marry the wrong person and talks against it. I think divorce is a good idea for some people. Anyway, can’t complain about what we can’t control. I hope President Monson is able to get some rest now.

I’m OK with Oaks because I like much of what he says in his Conference talks. He tends to focus on doctrine (or at least his view of what is doctrine) and uses many scriptural references without really reading stuff into them that’s not really there. He could smile more and try to be less boring though.

BUT the GC Oaks and the Oaks who speaks outside GC are different. I have met the guy twice, the first time as a missionary when he was very new. He also did a stake conference here once. More recently he was the main speaker at our regional broadcast multi stake conference. His talk there wasn’t horrible (and he didn’t mention religious freedom), but he did say a couple things he probably wouldn’t have said in GC and that I don’t particularly care for. He called earrings and tattoos graffiti on the body (way to win over those millennials!). The other thing he said is just a pet peeve of mine, but I don’t think I’ve heard him say anything like it in GC before.

That said, in the FP he won’t be doing stake conferences, etc., and is better than the alternative IMO.