Your thoughts on church leaders

[BlueHair]

Who says that? No one says that and means it. Not even the military expects that sort of obedience. People may say that, and they may have a spiritual witness to follow the counsel of a leader, but they are also free to reject it and, if it offends their sensibilities they should seek their own confirmation or path. We are all judged for our own transgressions, after all.

I think there are benefits, blessings if you will, for many principles such as sacrifice and selflessness and these will operate whether or not the motivating factor for performing them is a divine directive or a peachy idea by a SP. Most believers will do what a SP says because he is the SP and we will benefit from the choice whether or not it is directly from God. At the same time, the same set of people would need to obtain their own confirmation if the directive was to slay Laban, or move to Missouri, or some such. The notion of 'blind obedience' is so oft criticized but, in my experience, only a very few persons (VERY few) would ever qualify as actually being in that category.

Is God obligated to bless us for obeying a Stake President when the SP is speaking out of turn? This line of thinking is scary to me because it places the SP above God. God is basically obeying the Stake President.

[BlueHair]

That's a shock.

Would you have a problem disobeying if it was a horrible idea?

[creekster]

Is God obligated to bless us for obeying a Stake President when the SP is speaking out of turn? This line of thinking is scary to me because it places the SP above God. God is basically obeying the Stake President.

What do you think? Do you think anyone thinks God is obligated to do so? Do you think that is what I said? Blessings are rarely, IMO, magical bestowals of attributes or characteristics. Instead they are the inevitable result or consequence of a choice. If we sacrifice we become more selfless; if we give we become more charitable. If a SP tells us to do something and it is consistent with one of these types of principle we are benefited/blessed as a natural consequence of that choice. This is why God tells us to live by these principles, because they work and make us better. Being obedient to suggestions that are compliant with these principles can rarely hurt us (if done within in reason, which is a purely subjective standard) and will almost certainly help us.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Who says that? No one says that and means it. Not even the military expects that sort of obedience. People may say that, and they may have a spiritual witness to follow the counsel of a leader, but they are also free to reject it and, if it offends their sensibilities they should seek their own confirmation or path. We are all judged for our own transgressions, after all.

I think there are benefits, blessings if you will, for many principles such as sacrifice and selflessness and these will operate whether or not the motivating factor for performing them is a divine directive or a peachy idea by a SP. Most believers will do what a SP says because he is the SP and we will benefit from the choice whether or not it is directly from God. At the same time, the same set of people would need to obtain their own confirmation if the directive was to slay Laban, or move to Missouri, or some such. The notion of 'blind obedience' is so oft criticized but, in my experience, only a very few persons (VERY few) would ever qualify as actually being in that category.

People may not word it precisely that way, but I was trying to provide a generic definition that would fit different types of organizations. I hesitated to provide a definition to a group composed of so many lawyers. It's a trap!!

Nevertheless, we can agree to disagree on how widespread it is. I think the modern church implicitly promotes blind obedience. They certainly don't use that expression, but is a rare thing indeed when we are encouraged to get a confirmation that what we are hearing is divine.

I always liked this quote from J. Reuben Clark:

"We can tell when the speakers are 'moved upon by the Holy Ghost' only when we, ourselves are 'moved upon by the Holy Ghost.' In a way, this completely shifts the responsibility from them to us to determine when they so speak."

I would be shocked to hear something like this at GC today.

[BlueHair]

What do you think? Do you think anyone thinks God is obligated to do so? Do you think that is what I said? Blessings are rarely, IMO, magical bestowals of attributes or characteristics. Instead they are the inevitable result or consequence of a choice. If we sacrifice we become more selfless; if we give we become more charitable. If a SP tells us to do something and it is consistent with one of these types of principle we are benefited/blessed as a natural consequence of that choice. This is why God tells us to live by these principles, because they work and make us better. Being obedient to suggestions that are compliant with these principles can rarely hurt us (if done within in reason, which is a purely subjective standard) and will almost certainly help us.

I just wanted to be clear because it seemed like you were saying we will be blessed for obeying the Stake President's "peachy idea" even if it's not inspired.

[creekster]

I just wanted to be clear because it seemed like you were saying we will be blessed for obeying the Stake President's "peachy idea" even if it's not inspired.

I think I was being pretty clear. If you think somethign I said was unclear, which is always possible, tell me.

Let me ask you this: Do you think you can only be 'blessed' by following inspired counsel? Or sometime do people get it right even without 'inspiration'? Or is some inspritaton mostly the persipration of understanding the principles God wants us to follow and using them in leading a congregation? What do people expect here, a heavenly messenger every time there is an openign in the elder's quorum presidency?

Part of our job here is to submit to God's will, which we can do, at least intially, by understanding his principles and submitting to those at all times, even when they are given to us in counsel from our leaders. By such submission we receive blessings/benefits.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I think I was being pretty clear. If you think somethign I said was unclear, which is always possible, tell me.

Let me ask you this: Do you think you can only be 'blessed' by following inspired counsel? Or sometime do people get it right even without 'inspiration'? Or is some inspritaton mostly the persipration of understanding the principles God wants us to follow and using them in leading a congregation? What do people expect here, a heavenly messenger every time there is an openign in the elder's quorum presidency?

Part of our job here is to submit to God's will, which we can do, at least intially, by understanding his principles and submitting to those at all times, even when they are given to us in counsel from our leaders. By such submission we receive blessings/benefits.

I think you are building a straw man. I think most of us (me, certainly) accept the majority of what goes on without a second thought.

[BlueHair]

I think I was being pretty clear. If you think somethign I said was unclear, which is always possible, tell me.

Let me ask you this: Do you think you can only be 'blessed' by following inspired counsel? Or sometime do people get it right even without 'inspiration'? Or is some inspritaton mostly the persipration of understanding the principles God wants us to follow and using them in leading a congregation? What do people expect here, a heavenly messenger every time there is an openign in the elder's quorum presidency?

Part of our job here is to submit to God's will, which we can do, at least intially, by understanding his principles and submitting to those at all times, even when they are given to us in counsel from our leaders. By such submission we receive blessings/benefits.

I think you can get it right just by thinking things through. We may be using the word differently. I was using it like a verb. God actively blessing someone, not just reaching a good result based on cause and effect. If we are just talking about good things happening because we made a good choice, I agree 100%.

As far as submitting to God's will goes, I am also on board 100%. I don't believe that everything that comes out of a leader's mouth is God's will. To me, there is nothing noble about obeying a leader when it's not God's will. I'm not saying you are saying anything different, I'm just stating it for the sake of clarification.

[RobinFinderson]

People who follow God's will, even if though they don't understand it and would prefer to do something else, are total brown-nosing suck-ups. Question: Do you really think that God wants to surround Himself with a bunch of ass-kissers? I think not.

[LA Ute]

I think some decent definitions have been offered already, but I would say anytime someone says "Person X is my leader. I am going to do whatever person X tells me to do, no matter the circumstances." In other words, unquestioning, uncritical obedience to every directive. A prime example would be "When the prophet speaks, the thinking has been done."

There may be a number of reasons for accepting that kind of a leader-follower dynamic (military, religion, corporate, etc.) and blind obedience can be a good thing and highly effective in certain situations. I just don't see it as a healthy and sustainable approach in a religious context.

Agreed. In fairness, I think it is probably easier to state what is not blind obedience than what is. I also do not think the church (meaning its leaders) teach or encourage blind obedience as you have defined it, and I think to do so would be to teach false doctrine. I don't think you and I disagree on that.

[BlueHair]

People who follow God's will, even if though they don't understand it and would prefer to do something else, are total brown-nosing suck-ups. Question: Do you really think that God wants to surround Himself with a bunch of ass-kissers? I think not.

What? God loves ass-kissers!

[ERCougar]

Agreed. In fairness, I think it is probably easier to state what is not blind obedience than what is. I also do not think the church (meaning its leaders) teach or encourage blind obedience as you have defined it, and I think to do so would be to teach false doctrine. I don't think you and I disagree on that.

So what does "When the prophet speaks, the thinking is done" mean?

[LA Ute]

So what does "When the prophet speaks, the thinking is done" mean?

It seems to encourage pretty blind obedience. But (serious question) can you tell me where that is taught, and by whom? It's foreign to my experience.

[RobinFinderson]

What? God loves ass-kissers!

Only people who were not good enough at something to do it professionally, and ended up working as a teacher, love ass-kissers. These people generally lack the social skills and grit necessary to succeed in the 'real world.' Most of us would also call these people 'dorks' and 'nerds,' though the pool of all dorks and nerds also includes people who would never succeed at teaching. God is NOT a dork or a nerd, and therefore would NOT want to surround Himself with ass-kissers.

[ERCougar]

It seems to encourage pretty blind obedience. But (serious question) can you tell me where that is taught, and by whom? It's foreign to my experience.

Is that the first time you've heard that phrase?