NOM

There was a series of articles recently on lds.org about the Q12. The last article is about sustaining our leaders. You can read it here: https://www.lds.org/church/news/inside- ... e?lang=eng

I could spend a lot of time taking the whole concept of sustaining apart. However, the last sentence in the article hit me the hardest. We get the following quote:

“Another thing that the members can do to sustain me as one of the Twelve is to forgive me for not being perfect,” said Elder Renlund with a smile.

I have never asked for perfect leaders. I don't know anyone who ever has. But our leaders could acknowledge the problems seen in the church. They could show that they are sympathetic to the concerns that members have. What angers me is that the first job of church leaders seems to be to maintain the image and authority of the leaders. By setting up the strawman that I just want perfect leaders, it prevents the church from having to take any action to improve. Concerns are written off as unreasonable demands.

Agreed. There is a huge difference between expecting perfection and expecting decency and the false equivalency used by apologists is a smoke screen.

It seems like they are deliberately obtuse sometimes. It allows them to ignore legitimate issues by falsely equating unequal things. Like equating the point that apostles don't speak directly to Jesus as many believe to requiring apostles to be perfect.

I have a brother (different than the one scheduled to give a chastity lesson to Beehives) who is often deliberately obtuse to combat my valid points. In our family get together Sunday when we were discussing consent he asked for everyone who thinks rape is bad to raise their hands, trying to make it seem like my problems with not explicitly developing an understanding of consent at church was stupid. Up to that point we had been having a pretty good discussion. He's a slippery bugger...

No one ever expected Elder Renlund to be perfect - they just expect him to be as honest with them as the Church expects us to be with it. And he isn't. Honesty in the Church isn't a two-way street. No one expects him to be perfect, but if he is going to claim the title of a prophet, seer, and revelator, it isn't unreasonable to expect him to prophesy, see, and revelate once in a while. No one expects him to be perfect, but if he claims to be an apostle like the ones in the New Testament, it is reasonable to expect him to do the things the apostles in the New Testament could do - heal people, speak in tongues, boldly proclaim the Gospel at risk of their own lives, etc. He doesn't do any of those things.

No one expects him to be perfect. They just expect him to be an apostle, a prophet, seer, and revelator, and he doesn't act like any of those things. And he is dishonest, because he withholds information with the intent to deceive. It isn't about perfection, that was never the expectation.

Parenthetically, I never felt Joseph Smith had to be perfect - but he couldn't be the kind of guy I couldn't trust alone with my wife and daughters if I was going to believe he was a prophet.

I stuck my head in a hat and translated Rasband's comment:

“Another thing that the members can do to sustain me as one of the Twelve is to worship me for appearing to be perfect even when I know I am,” said Elder Renlund with a smile.

Rasband reminds me of the time when Bednar was new and was trying to flex his spiritualness all over the place. He was giving pickle talks and going on world visits all the while competing with Uchtdorf for the title of "coolest apostle". At some point he realized he lost and he became just another dude stuck in middle apostleship silently expressing his apostle maturity while waiting for all the other senior apostles to die.

One day he will rule Mormon Planet Earth!

Seems that asking to forgive Elder Renlund's imperfections and asking to sustain the Brethren should be made in two separate requests. Jumbling these two ideas together makes it seem like we are being asked to sustain horribly flawed policies, pronouncements or behaviors of the Brethren.

moksha wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 12:29 pm Seems that asking to forgive Elder Renlund's imperfections and asking to sustain the Brethren should be made in two separate requests. Jumbling these two ideas together makes it seem like we are being asked to sustain horribly flawed policies, pronouncements or behaviors of the Brethren.

We are.

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 10:54 am
No one expects him to be perfect, but if he is going to claim the title of a prophet, seer, and revelator, it isn't unreasonable to expect him to prophesy, see, and revelate once in a while. No one expects him to be perfect, but if he claims to be an apostle like the ones in the New Testament, it is reasonable to expect him to do the things the apostles in the New Testament could do - heal people, speak in tongues, boldly proclaim the Gospel at risk of their own lives, etc. He doesn't do any of those things.

No one expects him to be perfect. They just expect him to be an apostle, a prophet, seer, and revelator, and he doesn't act like any of those things. And he is dishonest, because he withholds information with the intent to deceive. It isn't about perfection, that was never the expectation.

+1

Now that I'm outside of the TBM thinking the whole way Mormonism picks its religious leaders seems so, so crazy. Renlund is a cardiologist. And from his Wikipedia page it looks like he is a pretty talented one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dale_G._Renlund
He went through years of rigorous schooling and training to earn the title cardiologist. Why take him out of that and give him a new title and put him in a position where he is expected to dispense spiritual guidance? He's a cardiologist, not a theologian!! He's not trained for that. None of them are. You wouldn't bestow the title cardiologist on a theologian and expect them to do what a cardiologist does because people would die. And the really sad thing is, people are dying. They are taking their lives because they believe Renlund and pals are really talking for God. NBI is right. No one expects Renlund and pals to be perfect, but we expect them to at least be honest.

It feels like there's a disconnect. I think every member of the church would agree that church leaders aren't perfect but we never nail down what "not perfect" means.

To most I think it means that leaders are capable of sin, they are not perfect, they have flaws. Where I think we disagree is that I believe their imperfections extend to what they claim to be the will of god. They are imperfect people that can also misinterpret the will of god.

That's the line orthodox members don't want to cross. Leaders can make mistakes in their personal lives but their revelations and policies are perfect.

Part of the problem is the idea that god will not let the prophet lead the church astray. I think it goes back to BY and that is the reason everyone follows the, they are lead by god and god will not let them damage the church. So whatever they do, god mush be okay with. If they were really leading the church astray, then god would take them out. If they are still there, then god approves and the circular logic continues.

MoPag wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:26 am

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Tue Aug 28, 2018 10:54 am
No one expects him to be perfect, but if he is going to claim the title of a prophet, seer, and revelator, it isn't unreasonable to expect him to prophesy, see, and revelate once in a while. No one expects him to be perfect, but if he claims to be an apostle like the ones in the New Testament, it is reasonable to expect him to do the things the apostles in the New Testament could do - heal people, speak in tongues, boldly proclaim the Gospel at risk of their own lives, etc. He doesn't do any of those things.

No one expects him to be perfect. They just expect him to be an apostle, a prophet, seer, and revelator, and he doesn't act like any of those things. And he is dishonest, because he withholds information with the intent to deceive. It isn't about perfection, that was never the expectation.

+1

Now that I'm outside of the TBM thinking the whole way Mormonism picks its religious leaders seems so, so crazy. Renlund is a cardiologist. And from his Wikipedia page it looks like he is a pretty talented one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dale_G._Renlund
He went through years of rigorous schooling and training to earn the title cardiologist. Why take him out of that and give him a new title and put him in a position where he is expected to dispense spiritual guidance? He's a cardiologist, not a theologian!! He's not trained for that. None of them are. You wouldn't bestow the title cardiologist on a theologian and expect them to do what a cardiologist does because people would die. And the really sad thing is, people are dying. They are taking their lives because they believe Renlund and pals are really talking for God. NBI is right. No one expects Renlund and pals to be perfect, but we expect them to at least be honest.

This happened in China. Mao put farmers in doctors offices and doctors in the field. It was a power play. .. of course if he needed a doctor, they pulled someone out of the field!

Thoughtful wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:23 pm This happened in China. Mao put farmers in doctors offices and doctors in the field. It was a power play. .. of course if he needed a doctor, they pulled someone out of the field!

Just once in the church, I'd like to see a machinist or plumber become a GA, though. I feel like the church chooses its leaders from the elite. I remember when Rasband was called, he reminded everyone that he was one of the "weak and simple." He had a 7 figure salary before he became a GA, but he was weak and simple. That does not make sense.

If anyone knows of a GA that was working class, please correct me.

I don't expect them to be perfect, but not being a complete ass hat would be a good start. IMHO Uchtdorf seems to fit what I would expect, if they were all more like him it would be a lot easier for me to accept the "golly gee, you can't expect us to be perfect" premise.

I have personally met Rasband, Ballard and Oaks. All three came off as extremely conceited, arrogant and self absorbed. This is not something I felt from many a GA or SP I have met though. My TBM friend has met Rasband and Uchtdorf, he agreed with my assessment of Rasband while saying that DFU came off as super humble and sincere by comparison.

I can't go out and murder a bus load of nuns and then just cop out by saying "Meh, you can't expect me to be perfect." I know that's an extreme exaggeration, but you get the point.

Just This Guy wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 7:22 pm Part of the problem is the idea that god will not let the prophet lead the church astray. I think it goes back to BY and that is the reason everyone follows the, they are lead by god and god will not let them damage the church. So whatever they do, god mush be okay with. If they were really leading the church astray, then god would take them out. If they are still there, then god approves and the circular logic continues.

Where I remember hearing it is from Wilford Woodruff in official declaration 1 (so it's canon). I don't want to be an apologist for him or the "doctrine" but when I try to come up with a context for him saying that I usually land on:

WW: We really, really need to stop practicing polygamy.
Members: But Joseph Smith said...
WW: Seriously guys, I'm tired of living in hiding and evading the law.
Members: That sounds like your problem.
WW: If we don't stop soon the government is going to dissolve our business and seize all our assets.
Members: Yeah, but Joseph said... and I kinda like having multiple sex partners.
WW: The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty.

In other words I think he didn't have the charisma that previous prophets enjoyed and he struggled to get the members to listen to him. The statement was a pure power play, a last ditch effort to get people to toe the line.

And now it's doctrine.

At what point in Mormon history did the Q12 become perfect rock stars?

2bizE wrote: ↑Thu Aug 30, 2018 4:32 pm At what point in Mormon history did the Q12 become perfect rock stars?

When they got their first hit single, during a whirlwind tour of talks, blessings and revelation. I got backstage passes to one of their concerts while they were still cheap. After the devotional, McConkie took one look at my girlfriend and sent me away. I never saw her again.

What a wild year.

blazerb wrote: ↑Thu Aug 30, 2018 6:14 am
Just once in the church, I'd like to see a machinist or plumber become a GA, though[...]If anyone knows of a GA that was working class, please correct me.

Classism is just one of those "imperfections" we're supposed to forgive I guess?

Seriously, though here's the current set of 12:
Ballard—owned car dealerships (took over the family dealership)
Holland—university president
Uchtdorf—pilot, VP of Lufthansa
Bednar—university president
Cook—attorney, *literally privatized hospitals*
Christofferson—attorney
Andersen—VP of a healthcare corporation
Rasband—President and CEO of Huntsman Chemical
Stevenson—COO of a health/fitness corporation
Renlund—cardiologist, professor
Gong—professor, advisor to US Dept of State, US Dept of Education
Soares—employed by the church (auditor, accountant, "director of temporal affairs" for Brazil South Area)

There's nothing that says these folks don't know what it's like being at the bottom, but it's clear none of them have been there for a while. Still waiting for that machinist.

Long time lurker here, just had to chime in on this one.

We all know the word "perfection" somehow belongs in the same sentence as "church leaders," but we sometimes have a hard time finding the right way to fit it in. Here's how I think these words connect in a sentence: Church leaders expect members to be perfect in sustaining them.