Revelation Different from Apostles and Prophets

[Anonymous]

Gregory L. Smith recently posted “What Should I Do If I Think I’ve Received Revelation Different from Apostles and Prophets?” on the FairMoromon Blog. I hesitated to even post this here, but I was really bothered by this post.

http://blog.fairmormon.org/2016/01/11/what-should-i-do-if-i-think-ive-received-revelation-different-from-apostles-and-prophets/

Here are the “five important principles drawn from apostles and prophets about such situations”

Quote:

1. As a first step, we ought to seriously consider whether we are mistaken or misled.

2. We should pray to have our heart changed if this is necessary.

3. We should be patient

4. If, after all this, we still believe we are being told that the leaders of the Church are wrong, we are still not authorized to publicly preach or urge a different course of action or teaching.

5. We may be taught things by revelation that are true, and for our comfort, but it is still not our place to spread them publicly, or use them to advocate for change, and so forth.

So pray for a change of heart, be patient, and keep your own thoughts to yourself? I guess I better shut up and patiently wait for further light and knowledge.

I agree more with ACMEAlan’s comment to the post:

Quote:

I grew up hearing quotes similar to President Romney’s:

“I assure you, however, that the spirit of the Lord will never direct a person to take a position in opposition to the counsel of the Presidency of His Church”.

There are two problems with this: 1- It creates the false perception of infallibility relative to the leaders of the church; and 2- It’s incorrect. All one has to do is to read the church’s own essays to come to that conclusion. Better yet, take a singular example of the correspondence between sociologist Nelson Lowry and Pres George Albert Smith in 1947 relative to blacks and the priesthood.

http://mormonstories.org/other/Lowry_Nelson_1st_Presidency_Exchange.pdf

We need to remember that these are good men with biases and weaknesses; they are trying to lead a large church and sometimes they get it wrong. I believe (also based on personal revelation) that the recently leaked position relative to gays and the children of gays is incorrect…not just incorrect, but damaging and dangerous. As a member of the church, I also believe that I have an obligation to help correct false policy. We need to remember that it’s our church as much as it is theirs (the leaders). Their responsibility is to serve us, not the other way around.

[Anonymous]

My husband got an answer that the new policy wasn’t quite right. What he received was that it came through the Spirit but wasn’t the strategy God wanted them to use. However, God let’s his leaders have free agency just like us so sometimes they make mistakes, but as long as it doesn’t totally mess up His plans, He will let it happen because free agency is important to Him.

That was what my husband felt and it made sense to me. I don’t like the first article you posted either because I feel like it’s saying you should be biased while praying that the prohpets must be right and if you get the answer that they’re wrong then you got the wrong answer. That screws with the belief of praying about whether the prophet is right or not. It turns it into ‘pray so you know it’s right, because it is, and that better be the answer you get’. There are so many examples in the scriptures of prophets making incorrect or bad decisions. I don’t like how now it’s turned into ‘the prophet is infallible’ when he is still a human and can make mistakes.

[Anonymous]

There are probably ways to disagree without publicly preaching or urging a different course of action or teaching.

FaithfulSkeptic wrote:

So pray for a change of heart, be patient, and keep your own thoughts to yourself? I guess I better shut up and patiently wait for further light and knowledge.

I think that is sometimes what is taught to us. Maybe that is wise at times. I can’t imagine that is always going to lead to the best outcome, but it is an option in some situations.

Quote:

As a member of the church, I also believe that I have an obligation to help correct false policy. We need to remember that it’s our church as much as it is theirs (the leaders).

I agree with this statement from the person that responded. I think we do get engaged at church, so we have talents and ideas to offer to help it be good for us and others.

Quote:

Their [church leaders] responsibility is to serve us, not the other way around.

Mmmm… :think: …maybe partially, but that isn’t really their sole purpose. Mosiah teaches leaders to be humble and to serve. But…their calling is to be stewards. A steward is not the same as a servant, even if a humble steward knows the value of service as part of their stewardship. Like a steward of a ship, their role is to deliver the message from the captain to the crew, and bring communication back. Whether you believe the captain is literally Jesus or if it is the prophet, the church leaders are stewards to take the message from that source to us (and communication breakdowns will always happen).

If my position is cook in the ship kitchen, I may not agree with the captain’s decision, but it is not my role to go turn the rudders differently. Insubordination is punishable. The captain should be loyal to the crew, but serving the crew is not their #1 objective as captain or steward.

[Anonymous]

If we should immediately doubt or second-guess personal revelation that disagrees with Church policy, shouldn’t we do the same with personal revelation that agrees with Church policy?

Otherwise why even have personal revelation? Why not just outsource our spirituality to people who apparently know God better than we do? Surely there’s nothing the Lord has to say to me that wouldn’t be better said to President Monson.

[Anonymous]

Joni wrote:

If we should immediately doubt or second-guess personal revelation that disagrees with Church policy, shouldn’t we do the same with personal revelation that agrees with Church policy?

I don’t know if we should…but it seems I often do. Perhaps that varies by person and their trust in the priesthood revelation or lack of trust in personal revelation, or both. The less I trust the leaders revelation is right for me, the more I spend time thinking about all of them, the ones I agree with and the ones I don’t.

It would be easier to just agree with them always and discard my own thoughts. But that didn’t sustain me in the past. So…what else can I do? I want more quality truth in my life, not easy truth.

[Anonymous]

I’m going to recommend this talk by Elder Oaks: 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

While I don’t agree with every word of the talk (I rarely do), there is some good stuff in there:

Quote:

First, the priesthood line does not supersede the need for the personal line. We all need a personal testimony of truth. As our faith develops, we necessarily rely on the words and faith of others, like our parents, teachers, or priesthood leaders (see D&C 46:14). But if we are solely dependent on one particular priesthood leader or teacher for our personal testimony of the truth instead of getting that testimony through the personal line, we will be forever vulnerable to disillusionment by the action of that person. When it comes to a mature knowledge or testimony of the truth, we should not be dependent on a mortal mediator between us and our Heavenly Father.

Quote:

A final example applies these principles to the subject of priesthood authority in the family and the Church. All priesthood authority in the Church functions under the direction of one who holds the appropriate priesthood keys. This is the priesthood line. But the authority that presides in the family—whether father or single-parent mother—functions in family matters without the need to get authorization from anyone holding priesthood keys. That is like the personal line. Both lines must be functioning in our family life and in our personal lives if we are to have the growth and achieve the destiny identified in our Heavenly Father’s plan for His children.

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 would think Elder Oaks was not really supposing that individuals might get a different message than priesthood leaders, but he does open the door for the possibility of our own testimonies taking precedence over priesthood authority.

In my calling I do have occasion to discuss things, such as gay marriage, where my opinion may not be in accordance with what seems to be the concurrence of the Brethren. That does not mean we can’t discuss them – but it does mean I can’t stand at the pulpit and declare the prophets are wrong.

[Anonymous]

There were a lot of people who publicly criticized the original version of The Policy – enough so that the Lord apparently clarified His meaning. What if those people had instead simply prayed for their hearts to be changed? We’d still be using the original, more restrictive policy – and we’d be wrong to do so, since it’s the updated policy that actually seems to reflect God’s will. (If that makes any sense)

[Anonymous]

I have used this talk in a lesson and it seemed to go over good. It was the High Priests and about 1/3 were sleeping and a few other playing farmville or words with friends.

[Anonymous]

Loyalty over conscience is a very hard doctine…but I believe that is what is taught…not just in this policy.

But for some reason…..way deep inside, I fight back at a fundamental level. I heard my inner self screaming: it’s my choice!

I don’t know if I will or can allow others to decide what my conscience will dictate. Loyalty is valuable, but not at the exclusion of my right to choose.

If not, why was there war in heaven?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[Anonymous]

I know some of the people who write or wrote for FAIRMormon, and the ones I know are good people – but I don’t go there for understanding that resonates with me. Too much of it is too apologetic for me, and the perspective simply doesn’t match mine.

[Author]

Posts