Confidence in church leadership

[Katy Lied]

so my mormon wife will obey my every command

I didn't realize you had a mormon wife. Wow, I've learned something new about you today.

[Katy Lied]

I would like for my relationship with General Authorities to be like my relationship with my current boss -- I respect and trust them, but I'm willing to give them a break when they're off on something. Unfortunately, it's more like my relationship with an old boss -- over time I've become disenchanted and lost much of the respect and trust I had in them. I'm no more likely to trust their opinions than most other peoples'.

So you like and trust them the more they see eye to eye with you? I think this is natural, we all do this with people. I know I do.

Do you believe that it is inevitable that one day women will hold the priesthood? Or do you believe that women will forever be separate and not allowed that honor? Do you think that the former or the latter position is closer to what God thinks?

[SoonerCoug]

I base my confidence in church leadership on their old age. It's not that I think they are wiser or better prepared to lead us than a young person. It's that they're so tame.

If we had young, energetic leaders, we'd be dealing with all kinds of problems. Other churches have young energetic leaders who end up getting busted download porn or having affairs or punching people (e.g. David Miscavige and Scientology). Even if one of our 80-something leaders did something bad, no one would ever believe it because they're so frail.

Which is worse for a church? To have leaders who are sometimes senile and living in the 1930s or 1940s, or to have leaders who make horrible mistakes like the ones scientology is dealing with right now? I'll take the elderly folks any day.

[Danimal]

So you like and trust them the more they see eye to eye with you? I think this is natural, we all do this with people. I know I do.

Do you believe that it is inevitable that one day women will hold the priesthood? Or do you believe that women will forever be separate and not allowed that honor? Do you think that the former or the latter position is closer to what God thinks?

I do not think that it is inevitable that women will one day hold the priesthood. I just don't see that changing, at leat any time soon. My opinion is that they should. The treatment of women in the church really troubles me.

[Katy Lied]

I do not think that it is inevitable that women will one day hold the priesthood. I just don't see that changing, at leat any time soon. My opinion is that they should. The treatment of women in the church really troubles me.

This is why I brought up this specific situation. I know this bothers you; I read your posts.

My question is: do you believe that God thinks that women should hold the priesthood and is waiting impatiently for the GAs to hop to it?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Danimal, you have described two bosses that work for the same organization, yet have entirely different management styles. Seems to me like that would be a common occurrence in any large organization. Do you think the church has somehow managed to handpick GA's that are all authoritarian by nature?

[Danimal]

This is why I brought up this specific situation. I know this bothers you; I read your posts.

My question is: do you believe that God thinks that women should hold the priesthood and is waiting impatiently for the GAs to hop to it?

I don't know really what to think. Some days I think God is banging his head against the wall trying to get them to understand. Other days I think maybe the whole thing's a sham and that he doesn't have any more interest in the policies of the church than he does in any other organization. What do you think?

[SeattleUte]

I base my confidence in church leadership on their old age. It's not that I think they are wiser or better prepared to lead us than a young person. It's that they're so tame.

If we had young, energetic leaders, we'd be dealing with all kinds of problems. Other churches have young energetic leaders who end up getting busted download porn or having affairs or punching people (e.g. David Miscavige and Scientology). Even if one of our 80-something leaders did something bad, no one would ever believe it because they're so frail.

Which is worse for a church? To have leaders who are sometimes senile and living in the 1930s or 1940s, or to have leaders who make horrible mistakes like the ones scientology is dealing with right now? I'll take the elderly folks any day.

hack

[Danimal]

Danimal, you have described two bosses that work for the same organization, yet have entirely different management styles. Seems to me like that would be a common occurrence in any large organization. Do you think the church has somehow managed to handpick GA's that are all authoritarian by nature?

I doubt it, although it's impossible for me to know for sure as I don't have access to any of them. I've heard many people say they know GA's and that they don't come across as authoritarians, and I have no reason to doubt them. I think though that the church institution prohibits us from getting to know them as individuals. If there is dissent in the administration on various issues, which I think there is, the organization does not permit it to be displayed for the public. There's no transparency. I'd feel better about some decisions if I could read an article about them arguing about it and debating it. Things would seem less authoritarian that way.

[SoonerCoug]

I don't know really what to think. Some days I think God is banging his head against the wall trying to get them to understand. Other days I think maybe the whole thing's a sham and that he doesn't have any more interest in the policies of the church than he does in any other organization. What do you think?

I'll tell you what I think. Either God is a clockmaker who doesn't intervene, or he doesn't care, or he doesn't exist. I lean toward the clockmaker version of things.

I firmly believe that there is some greater power to the Universe that we simply do not understand. That's what God is to me. I can't exclude the Christian or Mormon version of events, but from an intellectual perspective I don't think they are any more likely than other supernatural explanations.

[Brian]

You're always free to start your own church, and run it how you want to.

You're always free to stay over on cougarboard.

[SeattleUte]

I base my confidence in church leadership on their old age. It's not that I think they are wiser or better prepared to lead us than a young person. It's that they're so tame.

If we had young, energetic leaders, we'd be dealing with all kinds of problems. Other churches have young energetic leaders who end up getting busted download porn or having affairs or punching people (e.g. David Miscavige and Scientology). Even if one of our 80-something leaders did something bad, no one would ever believe it because they're so frail.

Which is worse for a church? To have leaders who are sometimes senile and living in the 1930s or 1940s, or to have leaders who make horrible mistakes like the ones scientology is dealing with right now? I'll take the elderly folks any day.

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpo...&postcount=332

Why didn't that post get a cuffy if so many people reacted to it?

[Moliere]

I have a great boss. I consider him to be very wise and even handed. He is firm and maintains structure while also being forgiving and willing to give second chances. He understands the overarching administrative mission while at the same time is familiar with hands-on realities and has realistic expectations. He offers rational explanations to new procedures and is sympathetic to differing views. As a result, he is trusted and respected by nearly all under him. He's the kind of person that when he says something that contradicts my own judgment or perspective it makes me take a step back and reconsider. Even if you disagree with a decision of his, you're usually willing to go out on a limb and try it because you respect him and he's earned some room for error.

A former boss was very different. He would sit in his administrative office and occasionally bark down orders. He either offers bad explanations or rationales or none at all; he mosly just commanded to obey. Because he stayed so distant from employees, he had little understanding of the day to day demands and realities of employees. When I started working there I respected him and trusted him naively and by default -- he was the boss and most certainly had available information that I did not. But over time it became clear that his judgment was hit and miss, he was heavy handed, and was unreceptive to feedback or other perspectives. He simply could not be trusted.

I would like for my relationship with General Authorities to be like my relationship with my current boss -- I respect and trust them, but I'm willing to give them a break when they're off on something. Unfortunately, it's more like my relationship with an old boss -- over time I've become disenchanted and lost much of the respect and trust I had in them. I'm no more likely to trust their opinions than most other peoples'.

So how is your relationship with general authorities? Obviously most of us don't have personal relationships with them (I don't, at least), but how do you relate to them? What's you dynamic?

No offense but this comparison is very illogical. Wouldn't a better comparison be to compare the GAs to the BOD at the company you work for? Or you could compare your boss to your bishop or EQP. If you are going to be making general comparisons, let's keep it on the same plane.

I have no issues with you stating your relationship to GAs is impersonal. That would be the same with me. I don't know any GAs personally but I still like their counsel. I would, however, prefer to receive specific counsel from my bishop and I bet the GAs would rather it be this way as well.

[Danimal]

No offense but this comparison is very illogical. Wouldn't a better comparison be to compare the GAs to the BOD at the company you work for? Or you could compare your boss to your bishop or EQP. If you are going to be making general comparisons, let's keep it on the same plane.

I have no issues with you stating your relationship to GAs is impersonal. That would be the same with me. I don't know any GAs personally but I still like their counsel. I would, however, prefer to receive specific counsel from my bishop and I bet the GAs would rather it be this way as well.

No problem if it doesn't resonate with you. What I'm saying is that that just like the old boss, the organization of the church is very impersonal, detached, and authoritarian. This doesn't say anything about any of the individuals in the organization, but rather about the way the organization operates.

[UtahDan]

Admittedly being so far from SLC I don't rub shoulders with GAs. The two I have met were 70s and were both great men in my eyes. I do understand the disconnect that danimal is talking about, but I wonder if that is just our ignorance of these people as human being who never come into contact with more than anything. My guess, could be wrong, is that if we somehow knew enough of them to form an opinion of the group it would be pretty favorable.

I think some folks could be experiencing the "don't like Congress, but do like my Congressman" thing. IOW, the like the ones they know because they are concrete. The struggle with them as a group because as a whole they are little more than an abstraction for most of us who can easily be blamed for what the "church" doesn't or doesn't do.

For me personally they started on a pedestal, then came down from there, but slowly as I have matured have been climbing higher and higher in my esteem.