- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Came across this. Thought it was pretty good. I have seen this before, and I think I even watched it when it was on. I do like Hinckley but he was a bit of an enigma. I think in some ways he really wanted to be progressive, and his forte was PR. On the other hand he’s responsible for the one set of earrings type stuff that is still part of For the Strength of the Youth. It could be said maybe he was afraid to make some progressive changes as were many of his cohorts (including Monson) but at the same time he retrenched some stuff. I think people loved him for things exactly like this interview – his soft, easy going demeanor and knowing what to say and how to say it. Is this the interview where he says that women could receive the priesthood if the church president received a revelation? Or was that with Mike Wallace? Here’s the Mike Wallace interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK0PxT5Vm4ghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK0PxT5Vm4g” class=”bbcode_url”> According to
thisthisQuote from W&T’s:
Quote:
RB: At present women are not allowed to be priests in your Church. Why is that?GBH: That’s right, because the Lord has put it that way. Now women have a very prominent place in this Church. They have there own organisation. Probably the largest women’s organisation in the world of 3.7 million members. There own ???. And the women of that organisation sit on Boards. Our Board of Education things of that kind. They counsel with us. We counsel together. They bring in insight that we very much appreciate and they have this tremendous organisation of the world where they grow and if you ask them they’ll say we’re happy and we’re satisfied.
RB: They all say that?
GBH: Yes. All except a oh you’ll find a little handful one or two here and there, but in 10 million members you expect that.
RB: You say the Lord has put it that way. What do you mean by that?
GBH: I mean that’s a part of His programme. Of course it is, yes.
RB: Is it possible that the rules could change in the future as the rules are on Blacks ?
GBH: He could change them yes. If He were to change them that’s the only way it would happen.
RB: So you’d have to get a revelation?
GBH: Yes. But there’s no agitation for that. We don’t find it. Our women are happy. They’re satisfied. These bright, able, wonderful women who administer their own organisation are very happy. Ask them. Ask my wife.
GBH: Are you happy? (to his wife…)
Mrs. H: Very happy! (laughs)
My husband and I remember this interview well. We were soo disappointed and shocked when Larry King asked him about that couplet about ‘as God was, man could become etc.’ was something we did not believe anymore. He did not seem like a prophet at all to us. I had read his bio and he seemed like he had lived a good life and was a good man, but he was pretty senile when we saw him at the Nauvoo dedication. The session we were in, he kept telling our stake president in the audience (whom my husband worked with at Palmer Chiropractic college in Davenport Iowa) that he was the stake president of the Peoria Stake. Our Stake President kept correcting him and said he was the President of the Davenport Iowa stake. President Hinckley also said at that dedication session that he would like to go to Peoria, IL and spit on the graves of all the persecutors of Joseph Smith. He was not with it that day, but I do not fault him that as things happen we you age. They should be released then is my opinion. I hadn’t heard about senility in GBH but I feel that it is pretty well documented in his predecessor. My understanding is that the FP basically takes over the official functions. I am fine with that model as far as it provides for administering the church. I suppose I might consider more how unfair it might be for the individual of diminished capacity to continue (even if only as a figurehead). We have discussed the couplet here before. We clearly believe that man can become like God. What is less certain and less clear is how God became God.
Fwiw, the couplet response has been badly misrepresented over time. He didn’t actually say what many people claim he said. Here is a link to a post I wrote here years ago about the interview and the couplet. There is a good discussion throughout the thread: http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1494&p=17146&hilit=Couplet#p17146
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.