- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I came across some material that made me think about President Kimball, and how the Lord works with even His Apostles. It makes me think a little about how to have faith in leadership in the Church. Here is the words from John L. Lund’s Audio CDs titled “Love One Another”.
Quote:Now, I know for a fact that President Kimball had as an assignment to deal with all those who were struggling with homosexual problems, and there were some other kinds of challenges that President Kimball had that were very, very difficult and it came to a point of sometimes weighing church membership in the balance and he had to make the decision. And it was on the basis of his decision that the first presidency of the Church would act at the time, because this was when he was an apostle.
President Kimball under those circumstances would say that sometimes lives are so complex, conditions are so incredibly confused, guilt and responsibility are so diffused in so many ways that it is very, very difficult and it is not a clear cut issue of right and of wrong. And he said that frequently with some of these more difficult problems (now with many there were answers that he could discern easily)but he said that when these very, very difficult problems would arise, that he would pray mightily unto the Lord and ask for His guidance and direction and sometimes would not receive a clear cut answer as to the direction that he should proceed and that when that would happen, he would stop and ask himself the question: “What is the loving thing to do?”
And he said some day I know, and I heard him bear this testimony, and he said that some day I know that I will stand before the judgment bar of God, and some of the decisions I made will have been wrong. I will have erred. I will have made a mistake that maybe the decision should have been another way.
And the Savior will ask me, “Why did you make that decision?” Unless you think the Lord can’t do that, He comes here in 3rd Nephi and He talks to the Nephites and says “Did you leave out the writing of Malachi and how about this that and the other, why did you do that?” Now they were a little stunned by that.
And he said, “I will face Him and He will say to me, ‘Why did you make that decision that way? That was not the correct decision.’
“And I will say from the integrity of my heart,” this is President Kimball now, “and I will say with the integrity of my heart, ‘Lord, I did that because at the time I wasn’t sure what was the direction that I should go and so I made what I thought was the loving decision.’”
And he says, “I am confident that God will look down upon me on those occasions and forgive me of my error.”
Do you believe that? I heard him give that talk to a small group around a dinner table in Salt Lake City.
The Loving Thing.
What do I hear in this message?
1. Apostles do not get answers to prayers sometimes, even about great and important matters. So they have to choose best they can. The Church is being led, and making decisions, by men who will not always receive revelation on what to do.
2. Apostles will err. They will make wrong choices. And they will be accountable before God for making wrong choices when leading the Church.
3. Apostles seek to do good. In their heart, they are trying to do what is right and what is loving. They are fallible, but good people.
I like the teaching he gave to choose what is
the loving choice. That is the gospel of Christ, IMO. Perhaps, however, we can see examples like this, when even Apostles are left alone in this life, not receiving answers, and are left to choose as mortal men the best they can. Even on important church matters. Even on matters that impact the church membership of other individuals. And sometimes they will be wrong.
This would also mean, therefore, that there will be times I will not receive answers to my prayers, even on very important matters. Because the Lord allows all of us to make a choices, the loving choice, and will forgive me if I’m wrong about it. That sheds a lot of light on the gospel, in my opinion.
Any other thoughts on this, or experiences like this? I find it interesting an Apostle would acknowledge not all prayers are answered, and that many things are not cut and dry and right and wrong.
Does that make you more comfortable sustaining Church leaders knowing this happens, even at the highest levels? Discuss.
Thanks for posting that, Heber. I wish every member understood the points you made at the end. My mother was one of Pres. McKay’s secretaries before she married my father, and my “take away” from her descriptions of that job was simple:
Quote:The top leadership are good men doing their best – and they don’t agree about everything.
Growing up with that understanding gave me a way to avoid the natural tendency to idolize them, while also giving me a way to respect them. As I grew up and realized that there were areas where I also didn’t agree about everything I heard at church (globally and locally), I was able to refer back to that insight and accept my own heterodox view much more easily than if I had been raised in a house where every word from a leader was equated with the inerrant word of God.
Finally, I also have tried hard to choose love when faced with decisions where I saw no obvious answer. I’ve regretted every time I’ve failed to do that.
I love it. Every bit. And it helps me to see past some of the stern language the perhaps went too far to describe sexual sin that was used in MF and other places. I like being able to see SWK as more multi-faceted and less of a 2 dimensional stock character. I am also aware that he shared this to a small group around a dinner table. I think the audience is important. Some things are perfectly appropriate to say to a small group of family or close friends that might never be acceptable in GC.
i know that SWK authored the Miracle of Forgiveness, which is among the most ironically named books in the church library. but on the other hand, i got to know SWK through close relatives, and through his area conferences…the author of MoF and the real, in-person man are to me to different people. From his first press conference after the surprising early passing of Harold B. Lee, I was convinced that this humble little man with a flawed voice was truly a prophet. his autobiography talks of his struggle to gain a confirmation if his call to apostle, with no earth-shattering event, his disappointment in the non-experience, and his humility of admitting such… i recently read the process whereby he revealed the 1978 revelation on priesthood, and his diligence in obtaining consensus even from those who wrote doctrinally on blacks and the priesthood…and i was moved and impressed that that is precisely how revelation really occurs. i was impressed tht he was angry with ETB for the BYU “14 Fundamentals” address, yet disappointed that there was no official retraction, and a year later that abortion of a speech made it into the ensign.
Yeah, I really loved SWK.
wayfarer wrote:i was moved and impressed that that is precisely how revelation really occurs.
I think this is interesting too…but is that really revelation? Councils and discussions and influencing to get consensus???Is that different than the Council of Nicea?
Mormon pop culture seems to paint a different picture of the revelations given to Apostles and Prophets. I think I’d rather teach my kids some perspectives more like Ray’s upbringing.
-sigh- Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
Yes, Heber, that quote does make me more comfortable sustaining church leaders. However, what makes me uncomfortable is the constant reminders that they are inspired or somehow supernatural while routinely downplaying the fact that all decisions are NOT inspired. Too much leader-“worship” (using that term loosely as I know we don’t literally worship our leaders) under the banner of inspiration of authority. I find it a lot easier to sustain these men when I operate from the premise they are just men doing their best, receiving occasional flashes of inspiration, and having perhaps more information than I do about the competing interests in the Ward they need to balance. This helps me reserve judgment about many of their decisions that seem illogical to me. THAT is easy to sustain.
At the same time, it doesn’t mean I have to do everything that falls from their lips. On that note, inm y securar work, I associate with a rather talented. retired, former president of a large, stock-exchange traded company. I’m amazed. Stuff comes down from the head office and if its not practical or obstructive, he just chooses not to abide by it, while covering himself in other ways. I get to pick his brain about his logic and I see that he supports his corporate leaders on critical issues, and the stuff that’s impossible to follow-up upon, or that he can get around without doing any damage when not practical, or obstructive to our local aims, he does his own way. He’s quite effective. One must be careful with this, but what I see is a man who has not given up his right to self-determinination while still showing enough respect for the institution that pays his salary….there is a church analogy there.
I think one can claim that same kind of self-determination with their relationship to the church. You have to understand what is critical and what is not. You have to understand what applies to you, and what does not. You have to decide what is best for your particular situation and put the rest to the side. And as a leader, make darn sure that if you ARE going to ask people to do certain things, that you ask them to things that are important. Less is more.
Thanks, SD. Your example in the business world is right on target! I reserve judgment as to whether its inspiration just because everyone agrees with it. There can be a good feeling in a room any time people get together and feel right about a decision. When it comes to the priesthood ban, I’m just glad they reached a consensus. I’m also thankful that whoever took the lead was able to present their case in a way that was both spiritually and rationally (maybe) convincing to the entire quorum.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.