- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Givens wrote:
So if we stop looking at our ecclesiastical leaders as though they were mini-gods, we would do so much better. At the end of the day we are the Church of Christ. We should only follow Christ. Our allegiance and loyalty should only be to Christ, not to intermediaries. Christ was quite firm when he said “do not put your faith in the arm of flesh.” Any flesh. And that includes our ecclesiastical leaders. We’ve gone a little bit wonky from where Christ is. I feel like Christ has been sidelined somewhat and unless we bring him back to the center in our collective life and in our individual lives, this isn’t going to go very well for us.
I think she was being very diplomatic in how she delivered this. But, for years I have felt the intent was to keep your eye on the Prophet and the “brethren”. Indirectly, this message also says to NOT keep your eye on Christ.
There are things that reinforce this; for example, Oaks said that there are 2 channels of revelation, and when we receive anything that counters the brethren, it can ONLY be from the devil. There were also statements about: “we can not lead you astray…”, etc; and unless I am mistaken, additional talks were given pulling up the 14 fundamentals from Benson.
Also, there is precedence from the OT. The Israelites were terrified at Mt. Sinai, and told Moses to speak to God for them, and they would look to Moses, not to God — or something like that.
So, what of this looking to the prophet instead of Christ?
Thoughts?
I think this is something that a lot of us do without even noticing that we are doing it. It becomes even harder to see in the presence of a strong belief that the prophet speaks for Christ, therefore focusing on the prophet is focusing on Christ, many people aren’t going to see a difference. Quote:We should only follow Christ. Our allegiance and loyalty should only be to Christ, not to intermediaries.
Christ is an intermediary. Sometimes I wonder if we completely missed the lesson Christ was trying to teach us and erred in making Christ himself an idol for worship… but that’s a different thread.
Quote:We should only follow Christ. Our allegiance and loyalty should only be to Christ, not to intermediaries.
Sounds like the first step to apostasy…
😆 😆 😆 Quote:…this isn’t going to go very well for us…
I like that a committed, believing member will say this. Instead of the “triumphalism” that came out of the early church and might be hurting us today, there’s this uncertainty. Instead of “no unhallowed hand…” her question is what the hallowed hands could be doing to thwart God’s work.
Good topic and I completely agree with Fiona Givens! Rob4Hope wrote:I think she was being very diplomatic in how she delivered this. But, for years I have felt the intent was to keep your eye on the Prophet and the “brethren”. Indirectly, this message also says to NOT keep your eye on
Christ. Rob, I think you meant to say that indirectly this message also says to NOT keep your eye on the
Prophetor the brethren, right? When the prophet or the brethren are in sync with Christ, then there is no issue. They are “one.” However, I am not one that subscribes to the belief that the prophet or the brethren will never lead us astray. I agree with Fiona Givens that we should focus on Christ (or even God as Nibbler points out) and not simply trust in the arm of the flesh, regardless of whether they are prophets, seers, and revelators. There are just too many examples in our history when prophets have clearly been wrong or led people astray.
That’s what has shaken me so much with the recent Church policy change toward LGBT couples and their children. In spite of how much the brethren say that this policy is done out of love and was revelation (I think that they sincerely believe it), I cannot believe or accept that Christ or God is the source of such an un-Christlike policy.
It is not all or nothing. Prophets have their function and their value to help us find Christ, but we cannot look beyond the mark and forget or overvalue the function of the prophets, because when flaws are revealed in mortal prophets we have to be prepared to handle the course we are on, not completely be stuck in frustration from expectations that they were never supposed to have flaws. There are many analogies to how we find our way in this life (lighthouses, maps, Israelites and Mt Sinia, iron rod, etc). These stories are told to help us find Christ, the Ideal. Prophets are story tellers.
I view Christ as the ideal, but sometimes so far off or more spiritual and mystical than practical, I am unsure how to take my steps today. Prophets are like coaches or experts who have experience to give me some pointers that help me apply principles to help find “the Way” or the ideal, and their stories are always told from their point of view, from their experience, and they want to help us by having us see it like they do.
Socrates wrote:Everyone wants to tell you what to do and what’s good for you. They don’t wnat you to find your own answers, they want you to believe theirs.
– Socrates, Peaceful WarriorIt would be foolish to not listen to wisdom and experience from others. But nothing can replace the purpose of this life, which is to get experience.
Quite often taking others advice may not result in the best outcome for you because the advice others give is based on their experiences, not yours. For much of the time, you must judge for yourself which is the best course of action.
I agree with Sister Givens, that I think we have over-trusted the prophets, like sign seekers, and if we want that…there will be people willing to fill that need for us. And I think God will let us get burned in order to learn how to adjust our focus and priorities and seek to follow our heart. This is how we gain experience.
FaithfulSkeptic wrote:Rob, I think you meant to say that indirectly this message also says to NOT keep your eye on the
Prophetor the brethren, right? Nope. I was talking about it exactly as is.
The Oaks quote plays into this BIG time. You see according to Oaks, if we get revelation that is different than what the “brethren” get, it can only be from the devil. So, we are being taught to follow the prophet, even if we receive what we believe is revelation from Christ (or God). Follow the prophet, he knows the way–not you when you pray and get answers that differ.
That is the message I often hear. It is subtle in many respects, but there none-the-less.
It feels like general membership people are being told they are stupid because we don’t know how to discern answers from God or not–but the “Brethren” are the only qualified ones who do, so follow them and don’t do your own learning/fact finding, especially if it differs from what WE tell you.
Naa…no resonate with me….
Rob4Hope wrote:looking to the prophet instead of Christ?
As Heber pointed out, it’s not really either/or. I suspect that faithful churchgoers might think they are following Christ AND the prophet, pope, minister.For me, I have a lot of heroes that make up a collection of people who have influenced my spirituality: Paul, Mark, Jesus, the Author of Hebrews (don’t know her name), John, GBH, my wife, StayLDS’s own ‘wayfarer’, A certain pioneer woman (not my ancestor) who I hold dear : Eliza Lyman, ETB (yes, that ETB… I have my reasons…), and DFU. I don’t really think I am following any of them INSTEAD of Christ.
Having said that, I agree that there is an unfortunate “cult of personality” around our top leaders. That can be true of any hierarchical organization; religious or otherwise.
On Own Now wrote:Rob4Hope wrote:looking to the prophet instead of Christ?
As Heber pointed out, it’s not really either/or. I suspect that faithful churchgoers might think they are following Christ AND the prophet, pope, minister.For me, I have a lot of heroes that make up a collection of people who have influenced my spirituality: Paul, Mark, Jesus, the Author of Hebrews (don’t know her name), John, GBH, my wife, StayLDS’s own ‘wayfarer’, A certain pioneer woman (not my ancestor) who I hold dear : Eliza Lyman, ETB (yes, that ETB… I have my reasons…), and DFU. I don’t really think I am following any of them INSTEAD of Christ.
Having said that, I agree that there is an unfortunate “cult of personality” around our top leaders. That can be true of any hierarchical organization; religious or otherwise.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Agreed – like many other things in the church it doesn’t have to be either/or.
The whole tribtalk interview the original quote came from is here:
https://youtu.be/Htfbf5kWWWchttps://youtu.be/Htfbf5kWWWc” class=”bbcode_url”> https://www.dialoguejournal.com/2016/transcript-of-trib-talk-a-new-mormon-faith-crisis/ ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://www.dialoguejournal.com/2016/transcript-of-trib-talk-a-new-mormon-faith-crisis/ One other point:
Rob4Hope wrote:There are things that reinforce this; for example, Oaks said that there are 2 channels of revelation, and when we receive anything that counters the brethren, it can ONLY be from the devil.
Here is the actual quote from Oaks (GC Oct. 2010)
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/two-lines-of-communication?lang=eng ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/two-lines-of-communication?lang=eng Quote:Similarly, we cannot communicate reliably through the direct, personal line if we are disobedient to or out of harmony with the priesthood line. The Lord has declared that “the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness” (D&C 121:36). Unfortunately, it is common for persons who are violating God’s commandments or disobedient to the counsel of their priesthood leaders to declare that God has revealed to them that they are excused from obeying some commandment or from following some counsel. Such persons may be receiving revelation or inspiration, but it is not from the source they suppose. The devil is the father of lies, and he is ever anxious to frustrate the work of God by his clever imitations.
In fairness to Oaks, he is speaking directly about those who seek to justify sinful behavior by saying they have received revelation different from the leadership. While I do disagree with his conclusion that such revelation is therefore of the devil, I agree it could be (and he does use the word”may”), or it could be our own thinking (which I think most “revelation” is anyway), or it actually could be from God and intended for one particular individual. Again, in fairness to Oaks, the overall message of that talk is that we need both the personal and priesthood lines of communication:
Quote:We must use both the personal line and the priesthood line in proper balance to achieve the growth that is the purpose of mortal life. If personal religious practice relies too much on the personal line, individualism erases the importance of divine authority.
If personal religious practice relies too much on the priesthood line, individual growth suffers.The children of God need both lines to achieve their eternal destiny. The restored gospel teaches both, and the restored Church provides both. I believe the highlighted part is very much in harmony with what Fiona is saying.
Rob4Hope wrote:You see according to Oaks, if we get revelation that is different than what the “brethren” get, it can only be from the devil. So, we are being taught to follow the prophet, even if we receive what we believe is revelation from Christ (or God). Follow the prophet, he knows the way–not you when you pray and get answers that differ.
What might be an example where this happens? I’m trying to see what exactly this looks like where something different from the brethren is of the devil.
As I started thinking of some, I actually got my thoughts confused if I’m thinking the same thing you may be.
I guess my question is…when do I feel I am following Christ and I am not following the prophet?
Heber13 wrote:Rob4Hope wrote:You see according to Oaks, if we get revelation that is different than what the “brethren” get, it can only be from the devil. So, we are being taught to follow the prophet, even if we receive what we believe is revelation from Christ (or God). Follow the prophet, he knows the way–not you when you pray and get answers that differ.
What might be an example where this happens? I’m trying to see what exactly this looks like where something different from the brethren is of the devil.
As I started thinking of some, I actually got my thoughts confused if I’m thinking the same thing you may be.
I guess my question is…when do I feel I am following Christ and I am not following the prophet?
There are some very good historical examples of where someone was doing something outside of the “channel of priesthood authority”. Examples off the top of my head:
1. Nephi killing Laban.
2. Founding Fathers in America committing treason and sedition.
3. Paul acting in opposition to the Sanhedran he represented and who authorized him.
I think those are good ones….and if I think about it longer, I bet I could come up with more…
In hind site we look at these guys and say: “Oh, they were really being led by God”. But at the time would we have said that?
Rob4Hope wrote:But at the time would we have said that?
This is the fun thing about mormonism…we look back on the prophets who went against authority and their stories are heroic.
Joseph Smith’s whole story was receiving revelation that was new and restoring things that were right. Did everyone say he was “obeying god” and following the proper channels of revelation? And yet…he followed his heart to follow Christ in his life.
And then that authority becomes established, and then the priesthood lines of communication become the new authority. But does that replace Christ in our lives?
Perhaps we just need the courage of Nephi, Founding Fathers, Paul, and Joseph Smith in our lives, because the pattern God is teaching is to move towards Christ, towards goodness and truth, and not the arm of flesh. The Garden of Eden shows us the example of the way things are setup for us to choose and then live with consequences. There is no “turn off your brain and obey commandments” in this plan, but listen to commandments and choose how you find the best way to prioritize conflicting commandments of limited revealed teachings.
What feels right to me is to search for truth, which is Christ, and use all within my power to live it, including words of prophets, but not only words of prophets.
Prophets will speak in general terms for the masses. It gets messy and full of caveats once you get specific to my life and situation. They can’t tell me what is right, they only advise and tell me to choose wisely. When I choose love and things turn out good…others will agree it is of God. When it turns out bad, it is of the devil. These are the stories we tell.
I once said that I believe that Mormonism is a system based worship experience. What I meant by that was that it is the system that has all the power…all the people in the system are just performing roles designated by their place in the system. The prophet is at the head of the earthly system but can be replaced with another without much damage/change to the worship experience of the individual. Suppose that Jesus was called away for a few hundred years to help start up a new universe somewhere far away. And in this scenario suppose Jesus appoints Adam/Michael to lead the church in His absence. I propose that this would not do much damage/change the worship experience of the Mormon individual. As long as whoever sits in the big chair truly is authorized by God to perform the leading role then the whole system radiates with power. But whoever that person actually might be is not so consequential. To the degree that this is true then we have a system centered faith rather than a personal centered one. I am not convinced that this is necessarily a bad thing – just thinking out loud.
For those that believe in the system then yes, following the prophet can be seen as an extension of following Jesus – just as following the SP/Bishop can be seen as an extension of following the Prophet. If you follow Jesus, then follow the Prophet that he has sent and placed over you. If you follow the Prophet then follow the local leaders that the Prophet has placed over you.
Roy wrote:If you follow Jesus, then follow the Prophet that he has sent and placed over you. If you follow the Prophet then follow the local leaders that the Prophet has placed over you.
I like your thoughts Roy. I also think that I should listen to what they are saying, not what people generalize they say.My local bishop encouraged us all to donate to scouting.
I personally feel strongly I was not in a position to do that now.
Should I just obey him?
Well…yes…he says donate if I can…but I can’t…so I didn’t.
How many times do they actually say you must do something? Not that often. They don’t take away our free agency. Perhaps they frame it in ways that are pressure-packed (ie. The prophet has encouraged us to support scouting, we will be blessed if we do. Or prop 8…there was pressure to vote a certain way for a political issue), but they don’t really force us to do anything. So…literally…I can follow the prophet when my heart is in the right place and I have my reasons to do what I do. Right?
I just wonder if “follow the prophet” is taken too literally sometimes that people create problems for themselves…because they put more pressure on themselves to have to think a certain way when that isn’t what the prophet is saying.
That is what I hear Sister Givens teaching…focus on Christ. Understand Roy’s point on leadership and authority chain. But maybe some people look past the mark with what they are taking upon themselves as obedience to a prophet that isn’t what the gospel teaches.
IDK.
I guess that is why I asked for examples. In theory, my head can spin on principle. In practice, what are we really talking about? I vote my conscience and take prophets teachings into account.
Heber13 wrote:I just wonder if “follow the prophet” is taken too literally sometimes that people create problems for themselves…because they put more pressure on themselves to have to think a certain way when that isn’t what the prophet is saying.
That is what I hear Sister Givens teaching…focus on Christ. Understand Roy’s point on leadership and authority chain. But maybe some people look past the mark with what they are taking upon themselves as obedience to a prophet that isn’t what the gospel teaches.
I think this is exactly what happens. The prophet receives revelation from God, so everything he says is a “commandment.” We recently had a PH lesson where someone mentioned the “commandment” to serve missions. Before I could interject, someone else did (love when that happens, actually) and asserted there is no commandment to serve a mission. Discussion ensued, the guy who thought it was a commandment still believes it is a commandment and most of the rest of us reached some middle ground about it being good if we’re able but not necessary for exaltation. I agree with you that this is what Fiona is trying to say. We can focus on gospel teachings and be just fine while there are those who focus more on the prophet perhaps because they don’t really understand. At some point they will understand. In my mind it’s very much like those converted to the gospel as opposed to those converted to the church. Some are converted to one or the other, some are converted to both.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.