- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
As I have indicated in other posts, I’m thinking about journals lately. I said in another thread I’ve kept one off and on for about 40 years. I think the reason I did this was because Spencer W. Kimball, who was prophet when I joined the church, kept one, and talked about them. He emphasized the importance of keeping one. As he passed on, and other prophet’s took the position, they had their own points of emphasis.
Ezra Taft Benson’s legacy emphasis was on the Book of Mormon. On my mission, he wanted to flood the world with the Book of Mormon.
Russel M Nelson (affectionately called Hustle M. Nelson, I heard, given his many sweeping and fast changes) has left behind what I consider to be an operational legacy of:
a) altering the home teaching/visiting teaching program
b) reducing the 3 hour block to 2 hours
c) combining the HP and EQ quorums into one group
d) Encouraging everyone to call themselves Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS rather than Mormons.
What do you think of these points of emphasis from each prophet? Are they simply a flavor of the decade in which they served, or are they wisdom for the time, specially crafted for us given the membership’s unique needs and time in which they lived?
I think the definitive conclusion that can be made is that each of these prophets had a specific interest that was carried forth in specific ways. I think that some of these traditions may be being pulled from what was important to that prophet from a previous stage of their life as something that stood them in good stead previously (a good example is being inspired by the Book of Mormon). I think that there are a lot of behind-the-scenes debates about various topics between members of the Q15 that are more in line with being “products of their times” – historians and writers have been writing more about those intersections recently actually (if they ever stopped / didn’t make it a priority).
I used to think it was “crafted for our time” and “crafted for us” – but I don’t think so anymore. I think these points of emphasis say a lot more about the prophet’s background and inclinations.
AmyJ wrote:
I used to think it was “crafted for our time” and “crafted for us” – but I don’t think so anymore. I think these points of emphasis say a lot more about the prophet’s background and inclinations.
This is my thought as well. I think these things are much more what individual presidents think is important themselves. I don’t have the energy to go looking for it now, but I recall shortly after RMN was installed his wife* said something along the lines of the changes being something he had wanted to do for a long time and now has the power to do so. I do think they each have their own agendas, and as Amy said I think these things are matters of discussion among the Q15 but they don’t always reach consensus. Using SWK as an example, during his administration all of the Q15 had survived the Great Depression and most had served in WWII. Is it any wonder there was an emphasis on self sufficiency, home storage, home gardening, opposition to public welfare programs, etc.? Those things are mostly absent from the teachings of the current Q15. RMN was a child during the Great Depression, and the next oldest (DHO and HBE) were also very young children. The others were all born after (although they likely had some parental influence based on their parents’ experiences). I do recall the time (80s into the 90s) when members were discouraged from seeking or collecting from public/government welfare programs, but now it’s actually encouraged before asking the church for help.
*Has anyone else noticed how initially Wendy Nelson was often heard from and referenced but is now rarely so? Personally I think there was a short-lived trend to recognize the wives of prominent GAs but that seems to have flamed out pretty quickly. I personally disliked the emphasis that was placed on Wendy and others, but that’s just me.
What Amy and DJ said.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.