The Largest Repository Of Ex-Mormon Material In The World
Containing 3,337 Articles Spanning 205 Topics
Online Since January 1, 2005
|
PLEASE NOTE:
If you have reached this page from an outside source such as an
Internet Search or forum referral, please note that this page
(the one you just landed on)
is an archive containing articles on
"GENERAL AUTHORITIES".
This website,
The Mormon Curtain
- is a website that blogs the Ex-Mormon world. You can
read
The Mormon Curtain FAQ
to understand the purpose of this website.
CLICK HERE to visit the main page of The Mormon Curtain.
|
|
|
GENERAL AUTHORITIES
Total Articles:
21
Members of the LDS Church that rise past the rank of Stake President are considered General Authorities. They leave their current jobs and work for the LDS Church full time. In exchange, the LDS Church provides them a full salary and often lavish living expenses. Those who rise to the rank of Apostle must sell any business they own and renounce any board of directors for companies that are not directly own by the LDS Church (Hinckley 1996). Generally those who reach Apostle sell their businesses and hand the money over to the LDS Church.
|
|
Members of the LDS Church that rise past the rank of Stake President are considered General Authorities. They leave their current jobs and work for the LDS Church full time. In exchange, the LDS Church provides them a full salary and often lavish living expenses. Those who rise to the rank of Apostle must sell any business they own and renounce any board of directors for companies that are not directly own by the LDS Church (Hinckley 1996). Generally those who reach Apostle sell their businesses and hand the money over to the LDS Church.
In 1984 the Quorum Of the Twelve were paid in the range of $60 to $80 thousand a year for living expenses, excluding benefits. This does not include any money received by business ventures or sitting on the board of directors for other companies. Most all General Authorities of the LDS Church are wealthy businessmen; most have companies whose income exceeds a million dollars a year. Most General Authorities have bank account balances in the six digit figure. In addition to the modest salary, the Prophet and his Apostles are given living arrangments. Thomas S. Monson lives in a 24000+ square foot condo estimated at a value of $2.8 million. The Prophet and his Apostles all have 24hr limo service provided by private drivers. The Prophet has 24hr "secret service" bodyguards who protect him anywhere he goes.
Quinn's book Extensions of Power does have more current numbers that also delineate by rank. The Prophet makes the most, his two counselors slightly less, and the remaining twelve lesser still. What Quinn also points out though, is that until earlier in the 20th century local bishops and stake presidents were in fact paid from a percentage of the tithing funds collected.
When the Mormon Prophet David O'McKay died in 1970 he had an estate worth an estimated at half a million dollars. David was a lifetime church employee (64 years) and accumulated this wealth from the LDS Church.
General Authority figures in Mormonism are treated as heros and celebrities. General Authorities expect obedience and reverence around them and command enormous power over the members. If a General Authority walked into a Mormon chapel and demanded everyone get on their hands and knees, not a single person would be standing.
This section holds articles surrounding General Authorities of the LDS Church. Many articles from this area are moved to individual Topic areas.
| | | Religion (and Faith) Is A Complex Issue - Zealots Are Hard To Figure Out
Article Archived: Wednesday, Feb 22, 2006, at 10:58 AM
Stored Under Topic: GENERAL AUTHORITIES
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: Former Church Insider |  | |
There is no way for me to really answer the question... since I can't read their minds, but I'll give it a try (you can call it the FCI dogma if you like). I do not hold myself out to be an expert on religion or faith, nor do I have any particular ability to discern the truthfulness or spirituality of others (unlike Hinckley had with Hoffman).
1. My guess, based on interactions with and observations of some GA's, is that (privately) a third have strong doubts, a third have some doubts and the other third are so self hypnotized that they would not ever let any doubt enter their minds. (it's probably been the same since the inception of the church.... there is just too much to lose in leaving or speaking out... isn't it interesting though that so many more GA's left publicly during the JS/BY era and were outspoken in their disbelief)
2. Many of the doubters are working on the idea of the "greater good"....meaning (in their minds) even if the whole thing is not true, there are benefits (blessings) that come based on conformity to a system that contains "good works", and a "self support" system for so called "believers". The church supplies a social support network and a mechanism for belonging....and if you play the game the way that is asked, and sacrifice "your time, talents, and everything with which the lard has blessed you and with which he will bless you to the LDS church", and do so with an unflinching and unquestioning eye to the glory that is promised in the afterlife.... you (and your family members who believe) will be blessed both in this life and later.
3. A personal friend of my wife is Bob Millet... and I have to be careful here (when I'm fully ousted I'll be more candid)....he's been in our home several times over the years, along with others in fairly high status within the Morg... and it's interesting in candid conversations with others who are well connected within Morg., that they sometimes let there guard down when talking about the church and it's leaders.
When you get a couple of those types together and talking... it's interesting what some of us "fly on the wall" types hear from these "authorities". Don't be fooled by the unison that the GA's appear to have in General Conference and in other public settings... there is much discord among many of the brethren.... and it can become evident in more private settings. Some of the conversations I've overheard lead me to believe that many, if not most of the brethren have doubts about the inspiration of the current leaders of the Morg. - but they've got too much to lose personally by leaving, and know better than to ever express their doubts.
4. A couple of years ago a family friend (from out of state) had a child at Primary children's hospital in serious condition (although not immanently life threatening) after an operation.... through some connections and upon the request of the family, I was able to get one of the 12 there to give the little girl a blessing. I asked one of the nurses later, how often one of the 12 got up to Primary to give a blessing to a child... she said it had happened only three times in the 18 years she worked there (as far as she knew) and that it was an was extremely rare occurrence. The girl did get better, but over the next few weeks, several inquiries came from CAB as to her condition.... and I have little doubt that this story will be told at some point in the future as a "faith promoting" event in general conference or in some printed venue. Had the girl died, so would the story....
You'd think if the GA's had a direct pipeline to healing powers, they'd have someone on call at Primary Children's Hospital on a daily basis.... it just doesn't happen, maybe they feel the priesthood is the priesthood, no matter who has it, and the 12 and other GA's are too busy for these kinds of ordinances.
5. You'll notice that the GA's and particularly the 12 and 1st Presidency do not make themselves available to the "common church" folk much. They protect their privacy and while it is easy to understand why, it is also easy to see in many ways that this avoidance, is for the convenience of these men as much as any other reason. They simply do not generally like dealing with the questions of faith and doctrine that would so easily come up and have to be dealt with in public settings. At some point in the future, I can get into this topic in more depth... but it does raise issues, as there are so many layers of "church authority" that common church members must deal with... yet, a few with connections to the Morg. seem to be able to pass right through this bureaucracy.
...(This is why I enjoy Steve Benson's and a few other insiders candid remarks... it is truly rare to find someone close to these guys who is actually willing to talk about what they know and have observed.)
6. So in summary, do I believe the leaders of TSCC know the "dirty truth"?... Most do.... others are so deluded by their authority, status and power (or the quest thereof), that they are willing to walk blindly in the face of the truth that the Morg. is a fraud.
But he same can be said about so many religions....The question that must be asked is "are any of the church's true?"... which one should I join?.... maybe I should go to a grove and pray about it....
| I’m about tired of Mormons claiming that things their old church leaders said are no longer valid, or that they need to be taken in the context of the times. Look at what Elder Merrill C. Oaks Of the Seventy said. See Merrill C. Oaks, “The Living Prophet: Our Source of Pure Doctrine,” Ensign, Nov. 1998, 82
We have large amounts of written historical material available to us, including sermons of early Church leaders. These give us background that help us understand the early events of the Restoration and the situations that existed in those days. This year we have the privilege of studying teachings of the prophet Brigham Young in priesthood and Relief Society meetings. There are wonderful continuity and agreement of these teachings and those of our more current prophets.
Isn’t it kind of silly that Mormons like to claim that past teachings of prophets need to be taken in the context of the times, yet have church leaders claim that the teachings of Brigham Young are in agreement with the teachings of modern prophets? Who is telling the truth here?
The audacity. Source of pure doctrine.
source n.
* The point at which something springs into being or from which it derives or is obtained.
* The point of origin, such as a spring, of a stream or river.
pure adj.
* Having a homogeneous or uniform composition; not mixed: pure oxygen.
* Free from adulterants or impurities: pure chocolate.
* Free of dirt, defilement, or pollution: “A memory without blot or contamination must be... an inexhaustible source of pure refreshment” (Charlotte Brontë).
* Free of foreign elements.
* Philosophy. Free of empirical elements: pure reason. (I add this since the word pure is being used to modify the word doctrine.)
doctrine n.
* A principle or body of principles presented for acceptance or belief, as by a religious, political, scientific, or philosophic group; dogma.
So what does that mean? Source of pure doctrine. I would argue that Mormons would not claim that their president is the origin, but rather the “point of origin.” I think of it as a spring. The spring is not where the water is made, just where it comes to the surface. Then pure. Free from impurities. So how can doctrine be pure if the president of the LDS church is sometimes speaking as a man. That’s not pure. Doctrine. That’s the body of principles that are presented for the members of the LDS church. Once the prophet has spoken, the thinking has been done. Decisions are not really presented to the membership for their acceptance. Members are supposed to sustain the leaders, not question.
So the president of the LDS church is either the source of pure doctrine or he isn’t. The explanation that the president of the LDS church sometimes speaks as a man is insulting. I have heard few other weak explanations that top this one.
| 1) "It is also to the Book of Mormon to which we turn for the plainest description of the Catholic Church as the great and abominable church. Nephi saw this ‘church which is the most abominable above all other churches' in vision. He ‘saw the devil that he was the foundation of it' and also the murders, wealth, harlotry, persecutions, and evil desires that historically have been a part of this satanic organization.(Bruce R. McConkie. Mormon Doctrine [1958], 130.)
2) "I think no more of taking another wife than I do of buying a cow."
- Apostle Heber C. Kimball, The Twenty Seventh Wife, Irving Wallace, p. 101.
3) "Brethren, I want you to understand that it is not to be as it has been heretofore. The brother missionaries have been in the habit of picking out the prettiest women for themselves before they get here, and bringing on the ugly ones for us; hereafter you have to bring them all here before taking any of them, and let us all have a fair shake."
- Apostle Heber C. Kimball, The Lion of the Lord, New York, 1969, pp
4) "You may inquire of the intelligent of the world whether they can tell why the aborigines of this country are dark, loathsome, ignorant, and sunken into the depths of degradation ...When the Lord has a people, he makes covenants with them and gives unto them promises: then, if they transgress his law, change his ordinances, and break his covenants he has made with them, he will put a mark upon them, as in the case of the Lamanites and other portions of the house of Israel; but by-and-by they will become a white and delightsome people" (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 7:336).
5) "The day of the Lamanites in nigh. For years they have been growing delightsome. . . The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation. . .There was the doctor in a Utah city who for two years had had an Indian boy in his home who stated that he was some shades lighter than the younger brother just coming into the program from the reservation. These young members of the Church are changing to whiteness and to delightsomeness. Spencer W. Kimball; The Improvemant, Era, Dec. 1960, p. 923)
6) "You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind....Cain slew his brother. Can might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, page 290).
7) "Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Volume 10, page 110.)
8) "Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race."
(Tenth LDS President, Joseph Fielding Smith The Way to Perfection, p.101.)
9) "Let us consider the great mercy of God for a moment. a Chinese, born in China with a dark skin, and with all the handicaps of that race seems to have little opportunity. but think of the mercy of god to Chinese people who are willing to accept the gospel. In spite of whatever they might have done in the pre-existence to justify being born over there as Chinamen, if they now, in this life, accept the gospel and live it the rest of their lives they can have the Priesthood, go to the temple and receive endowments and sealings, and that means they can have exaltation. Isn't the mercy of God marvelous?
Think of the Negro, cursed as to the priesthood... This Negro, who in the pre-existence lived the type of life which justified the Lord in sending him to the earth in the lineage of Cain with a black skin, and possibly being born in darkest Africa--if that Negro is willing when he hears the gospel to accept it, he may have many of the blessings of the gospel. In spite of all he did in the pre-existent life, the Lord is willing, if the Negro accepts the gospel with real, sincerer faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessing of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get celestial glory.
(Race Problems--As They Affect The Church, An address by Mark E. Petersen at the Convention of Teachers of Religion on the College level; Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, August 27, 1954.)
10) "We do not intend to admit to our campus any homosexuals. If any of you have this tendency and have not completely abandoned it, may I suggest that you leave the university immediately after this assembly.... We do not want others on this campus to be contaminated by your presence." (Ernest Wilkinson, president of Brigham Young University, in a 1965 lecture to the BYU student body, titled: "Make Honor your Standard."
| There was a time in the LDS church when GA’s were not afraid of tough questions from the general church membership.
The gospel had answers to even the most difficult question. Today however church members are not only encouraged but also taught not to write the general authorities about their gospel questions.
If a member somehow overlooks this policy, the members letter is forwarded to his/her local church authority with a letter of smug verbage putting the member in their place, criticizing the member for even writing the GA in the first place and reminding the member just how busy these church authorities are and just how puny and insignificant the member is. How dare a church member ask a question of doctrine of a church "general" authority. The dumb bastard?
So whatever happened to GA’s the likes of Joseph Fielding Smith, B.H. Roberts and Bruce R. McConkie. These men might have been up in the night but at least these men had the balls to put their answers to difficult questions down in writing. They did at least stand for something.
Joseph Fielding Smith did an entire series of books called “Answers to Gospel Questions“ Bruce R. gave us “Mormon Doctrine“. B.H. gave us “Studies of the Book of Mormon” and of course the first “History of the Church” before others whitewashed it.
All we get now are silly books like: Jeffery Holland's book “Modesty, Makeovers, and the Pursuit of Physical Beauty: What Mothers and Daughters Need to Know” or Boyde KKK Packers book: “Let Not Your Heart be Troubled” just to name a few...
It appears that the days of eating Meat are over...and the membership is back on a steady diet of Milk...mixed with an equal part of water. Wouldn't want to drink too much of that controversial milk now would we....
| According to LDS lore, when a prophet says something boneheaded/reprehensible/embarrassing/whatever he was speaking only as a man, not as the prophet. OK, let's say that's true. Then why would the Lord let false crap go uncorrected?
"Joseph, my son, the stuff you said about ____________________ is totally wrong. Pass the word on to the flock."
But since the so-called prophets aren't EVER speaking for God, they aren't going to be corrected -- at least not until some prophet down the line decides to call bullshit on one of his predecessors.
| | | Living Mormon Prophet Says He Expects Total Loyalty On Political Matters
Article Archived: Tuesday, Jun 6, 2006, at 08:21 AM
Stored Under Topic: GENERAL AUTHORITIES
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: Deconstructor | | |
For those TBMs saying that the church really doesn't expect members to support their political agenda, Hinckley taught otherwise.
The example Hinckley used in a recent General Conference is very similar to the one now over gay marriage.
"Now may I say a word concerning loyalty to the Church. We see much indifference. There are those who say, "The Church won't dictate to me how to think about this, that, or the other, or how to live my life.""
"No, I reply, the Church will not dictate to any man how he should think or what he should do. The Church will point out the way and invite every member to live the gospel and enjoy the blessings that come of such living. The Church will not dictate to any man, but it will counsel, it will persuade, it will urge, and it will expect loyalty from those who profess membership therein."
"The book of Revelation declares: "I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth" (Revelation 3:15–16)."
"I make you a promise, my dear brethren, that while I am serving in my present responsibility I will never consent to nor advocate any policy, any program, any doctrine which will be otherwise than beneficial to the membership of this, the Lord's Church."
"This is His work. He established it. He has revealed its doctrine. He has outlined its practices. He created its government. It is His work and His kingdom, and He has said, "They who are not for me are against me" (2 Nephi 10:16)."
"In 1933, there was a movement in the United States to overturn the law which prohibited commerce in alcoholic beverages. When it came to a vote, Utah was the deciding state. President Heber J. Grant, then President of this Church, had pleaded with our people against voting to nullify Prohibition. It broke his heart when so many members of the Church in this state disregarded his counsel."
"On this occasion I am not going to talk about the good or bad of Prohibition but rather of uncompromising loyalty to the Church."
"How grateful, my brethren, I feel, how profoundly grateful for the tremendous faith of so many Latter-day Saints who, when facing a major decision on which the Church has taken a stand, align themselves with that position. And I am especially grateful to be able to say that among those who are loyal are men and women of achievement, of accomplishment, of education, of influence, of strength—highly intelligent and capable individuals."
"Each of us has to face the matter — either the Church is true, or it is a fraud. There is no middle ground. It is the Church and kingdom of God, or it is nothing."
- President Gordon B. Hinckley. "Loyalty," April Conference, 2003.
Doesn't the church expect "uncompromising loyalty" regarding the letter read this week in Sacrament Meeting?
| General Authorities are often men of wealth and considerable influence within hamlets, towns and cities of their birth. They are men who have exercised the power of the priesthood in determining who is favored of the Lord, who should be healed from their afflictions, what changes should be made in scriptures, temple ceremonies and how to position the church in the ecclesiastical market place. The priesthood is the power to act for God. Members are told that every decision, every utterance, and every change to doctrine is inspired of God himself. The power of Priesthood endowment guides their thoughts to select temple worthy men of the church to sit in judgment over the rank and file and supervise the appointment of proper men as middle managers (stake presidents and bishops). They bear the power of the priesthood with eyes gazing into heaven. The power of their position arises from what the people think they can do for them or to them. The rule is plain within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,contrary speaking of the Lord’s anointed will be frowned upon. For the ritual of the priesthood to operate smoothly, super-experts (General Authorities) are needed who make sure that the other experts are performing correctly.
A historical review of the men of Mormonism reminds me of the words of John Stuart Mill (1806-73), speaking about the injustice to women and the damage done to them by men who have attained positions of power he wrote, “men are damaged as individuals, often in ways they are not likely to notice (which is part of the damage).” Mill believes that it is not good for anyone to be brought up to believe themselves superior to others, especially when it happens, as it frequently does, to be others whose faculties are superior to theirs.
Heber C. Kimball (1801-1868), member of the Twelve Apostles and councilor to Brigham Young, is quoted as saying, “I think no more of taking another wife, than I do of buying a cow.” Heber C. Kimball, The Twenty Seventh Wife, Irving Wallace, pp. 101. Apostle Kimball is also quoted while speaking to a group of departing missionaries, “Brethren, I want you to understand that it is not to be as it has been heretofore. The brother missionaries have been in the habit of picking out the prettiest women for themselves before they get here, and bringing on the ugly ones for us; hereafter you have to bring them all here before taking any of them, and let us all have a fair shake.” Heber C. Kimball, The Lion of the Lord, New York, 1969, pp. 129-30. This is the same man that gave his frightened, confused, fourteen year old daughter, Helen to Joseph Smith. Joseph married her in the secrecy of the holy temple. Emma was not invited to the wedding, as she was not invited to any of her husbands more than thirty temple sealingceremonies. Emma was invited to Joseph’s funeral, along with the other wives whom she also did not give Joseph permission to marry. In the case of Joseph Smith, John Stuart Mill was spot on.
Why do the powerful, sustained, elite priesthood bearers gathered in Salt Lake City suppose that by the authority of the holy melchizedek priesthood they have God’s blessing to make women suffer? According to Gordon B. Hinckley, “We must reach out to all mankind.” Reach out to all mankind, with what? Bullets penetrate Mormon underwear just like bullets penetrate underwear purchased at Walmart. A priesthood blessing is as good as the body’s natural resistance to the disease. Members of the Priesthood rejoice when a child blessed recovers from the common cold, but when they learn that the person on whose head they poured oil and placed their hands and promised full recovery has been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer they retreat to the fictitious gift of sealing them up to death and the after life. Mickey Mouse has the power to give such a blessing. The Twelve Apostles proclaim that Mormon’s no longer follow Joseph Smith’s proclamation to live The New and Ever Lasting Covenant of Plural Marriage.
So why have Dallin Oaks, L. Tom Perry and Russell M. Nelson been sealed to second wives in the secrecy of the Holy Temple? General Authorities have been reduced to “the-men-who-are-keepers-of-the-secret-that-is-no-longer-a-secret.” The relegation of women to be wives in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom to men who may be as damaged as Heber C, Kimball, Brigham Young, Joseph Smith, and members of the current Twelve Apostles is inconsistent with current answers given by the Brethren to curious journalists. Gordon B. Hinckley, offers his assurance that Mormon’s have forsaken the serfdom of polygamy, but in the secrecy of the Holy Temples, Mormons celebrate polygamy as the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage; the pathway to Godhood and a mansion full of dutiful, possibly surprised women.
An important fact about human suffering is that people will endure it if they think a higher power is watching over them. In that case they may even glory in their suffering.
For the huddled masses of Mormonism who have forfeited free thought and reason to the tyranny of the priesthood over individual expression and the common good of women, one must ask, are you aware that happiness requires individual freedoms?
Is anyone explaining to the young women of Mormonism that the General Authorities worship the covenant of polygamy every time they enter the temple? In 399B.C. Socrates puts forward the premise: “doing harm to people is wrong.” Proclaiming in the quiet and secrecy of the temple that the marriage is for time and all eternity, but to not mention that it is Mormon Doctrine that the bride will be one of many wife’s sealed to the groom, such a lie is to do harm.
What type of men would preside over such behavior? Only men who are damaged.
| | | Apostolic Confessions: Modern Mormon Prophets Don't Need To Prophesy Much, Can't Always Be Trusted To Prophesy Reliably, Aren't Really Into Prophesying And Need Help So They Won't Screw Up When They Try To Prophesy
Article Archived: Tuesday, Nov 28, 2006, at 07:30 AM
Stored Under Topic: GENERAL AUTHORITIES
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: Sourcerer | | |
INTRODUCTION: MORMON LEADERS LET LOOSE THAT GOD'S REVEALED CHURCH ISN'T TOO FOCUSED ON REVELATION
In another thread, "BYUBoy" noted that Gordon B. Hinckley admits that the Mormon Church of God isn't in need of much godly revelation:
"Subject: 'We don't need much revelation'--Gordon B. Hinckley quote of the day
Author: BYUBoy
"Q: And this belief in contemporary revelation and prophecy? As the prophet, tell us how that works. How do you receive divine revelation? What does it feel like?
"A: Let me say first that we have a great body of revelation, the vast majority of which came from the prophet Joseph Smith. We don't need much revelation. We need to pay more attention to the revelation we've already received."
(Interview with GBH by the San Francisco Chronicle in 1997)
_____
MORMON APOSTLES CONFESS THAT THE POST-JOSEPH SMITH MORMON CHURCH DOESN"T RELY ON MUCH NEW INFORMATION FROM GOD
In a private, off-the-record meeting with LDS apostles Dalln Oaks and Neal Maxwell in September 1993 in Maxwell's office, both told Steve Benson that God doesn't often work nowadays through modern revelation for the modern Mormon Church.
And when God does speak today to his Mormon prophet, He does it through a filter system--just in case the prophet might not otherwise get it:
" . . . [Benson] asked what constitutes an official Mormon Church statement . . .
"Maxwell replied by citing D&C 107, saying that 'we have a scriptural admonition that three High Priests preside over the Quorum of the Twelve.'
"Maxwell said 'the more modern approach' to matters of Mormon doctrine are governed by the Quorum of the Twelve and the First Presidency, acting together as a body.
"Maxwell asserted that once Joseph Smith had established the basic doctrines of the Church, then he was instructed by the Lord to call counselors.
"After that, Maxwell said, Joseph Smith's role as unilaterally revealing doctrine was much more reduced. Maxwell summarized by telling us there are four levels of fundamental Church doctrine:
"1. Those doctrines revealed by the prophet speaking alone;
"2. Those doctrines revealed by the prophet in conjunction with his First Presidency counselors;
"3. Those doctrines revealed in First Presidency statements, with the words of the First Presidency assuming 'a special status;' and
"4. Those doctrines revealed by official declaration.
"Oaks added that all of the basic Church doctrines were revealed by Joseph Smith early in the history of the Church.
"He said that the more modern approach of Church governance has been, since the time of President Joseph F. Smith, to 'beseech his counselors in the First Presidency to help him, to watch over him, so that they could together make the right decisions that God wanted them to make.'
______
TODAY'S MORMON APOSTLES DON'T ALWAYS TRUST THE MORMON PROPHET TO CALL IT RIGHT--CASE IN POINT: THE ADAM-GOD DOCTRINE
Benson wrote the following about the Oaks/Maxwell reaction to original doctrines announced by modern-day Mormon prophets that were subsequently abandoned as false doctrine:
"By way of background, the 'Encyclopedia of Mormonism,' vol. 4, says only the following about the Adam-God doctrine:
"'Brigham Young recognized that many people were not prepared to understand the mysteries of God and godhood. "I could tell you much more about this," he said, speaking of the role of ADAM, but checked himself, recognizing that the world would probably misinterpret his teaching.' ([Journal of Discourses 1:51], p. 1610, original emphasis)
"A more forthright and honest definition of what actually constituted Young's teachings on Adam-God was provided by LDS apologist Van Hale, in a 1986 pamphlet, entitled 'What About the Adam-God Theory?' Hale acknowledged that Brigham Young 'had taught a concept which generally has not been accepted by Mormons--namely, that God the Father, the Father of our spirits and the Father of Jesus [of both his body and his spirit], came to this earth, took upon himself mortality, and was known as Adam, the progenitor of the human family. Simply stated, according to President Young, God the Father became Adam.' [Journal of Discourses 1:50], p. 1)
"Maxwell told [Benson], "Adam-God was wrong."
"Oaks said that the Mormon Church does not accept Adam-God as doctrine.
"In response to [Benson's] observation that Brigham Young, in fact, taught it as doctrine, Oaks said that one can tell whether or not the matter deserves to be taught as doctrine by whether it is actually presented to the Church for approval--meaning, canonized and published as doctrine in the revelations of the Church.
"This, Oaks noted, was not done with Adam-God. Rather, he said, 'It kind of petered out and didn't continue.'
"Maxwell admitted that Adam-God was taught in Mormon temple ceremonies 'for a while.' Maxwell said that it was in the LDS temple where Young got some of his basis for it. However, Maxwell emphasized, Adam-God did not continue or 'persist as a doctrine that is taught today.'
"Oaks and Maxwell then attempted to put Brigham Young's Adam-God teachings in perspective. They said he was a relatively young prophet when he made his statements on Adam-God.
"They said they wished Young had had the benefit of 'a couple of good counselors to help him with some of the things he was saying.'
"Maxwell repeated a common maxim used among the Mormon faithful: 'A prophet is not always a prophet. He is only a prophet when he speaks as such.'
_____
MODERN-DAY MISINTERPRETATION OF MODERN-DAY REVELATION: ALLEGED MISQUOTING OF SMITH ON MORMONS AND MOONMEN
"Maxwell then offered some speculation.
"Maybe Joseph Smith, he said, at the end of a very tiring day, was sitting around in a social setting when someone asked, 'Where are the Lost Ten Tribes?'
"Maxwell said he could envision Joseph pointing up and saying, 'On the moon.' Maxwell continued by suggesting, 'Someone goes home and writes it down in their diary. Decades or years later someone discovers the diary and a spin is put on it not originally intended by Joseph Smith.'"
_____
LDS APOSTLES ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN AWAY FALSE PROPHESIES OF THE LORD'S PROPHETS BY SAYING PROPHESYING ISN'T THEIR MAIN JOB
In response to Benson pointing out modern-day Mormon prophet prophecies that later turned out to be false (such as Smith's prediction that a temple would be erected in Missouri before those living in Smith's generation died; Brigham Young's declarations that the United States would not survive the Civil War, that Blacks would not receive the priesthood until the remainder of Adam's posterity had been given the opportunity to hear the Gospel and that the Sun was inhabited by intelligent beings; as well as the false prophesy that Lorenzo Snow would be sent to proselytize extra-terrestrials while still in the flesh), Oaks offered the follwing explanation:
"'[W]e shouldn't be citing fulfilled prophecies because prophesying is only a minor aspect of what a prophet does.'
"Oaks said that, in actuality, the fundamental role of a prophet is 'to testify of Christ.' He said that 'foretelling events' is a prophet's "minor responsibility.'
"Maxwell said that Church members 'shouldn't use fulfilled prophecies to keep box scores.'
"He added, 'We've never had a perfect Prophet or a perfect General Authority.'
"When [Benson] pointed out Joseph Smith's failed prediction of a temple being built in Missouri before those living in Smith's generation would pass away, Maxwell commented with a laugh, 'Maybe there was too much foretelling and not enough testifying.'
"Oaks observed, 'Prophecies are for private use and private application, more than they are for general Church application.'
"[Benson] asked if it was not problematic for a Church to be led by prophets who are making frequent mistakes in their prophesying.
"Oaks replied, 'In total, there aren't that many mistakes that have been made.' Of 5,000 prophecies, he said, 'only five haven't been fulfilled.' He then added, 'But we shouldn't be keeping track, anyway.'
"Maxwell noted that according to one scripture, even Jesus was said not to know when the Second Coming is scheduled, so, Maxwell said, 'no one really knows' and 'everyone could be mistaken.'
"The bottom line, Maxwell declared, is that 'it is our duty to be loyal to the prophet.'
"He said that he disagreed politically with Ezra Taft Benson 'on certain things' but felt he could always follow him in good conscience when, as prophet, President Benson was emphasizing a particular aspect of the Gospel.
"Oaks agreed--but with a condition. Oaks vowed he would 'march from sunup to sundown' in following the prophet on a particular teaching but said 'if the prophet was to come out and say that we are no longer going to preach the Book of Mormon as true,' he "would look around for an affirmation of that by the Quorum of the Twelve.'
[Benson] asked how one could determine whether a prophet was speaking truthfully. Oaks and Maxwell replied that what the prophet says must be in compliance with the Standard Works of the Church.
"In response, [Benson] asked if the Standard Works of the Church are to be the ultimate guide, then what would be the use of a living prophet, since both Brigham Young and Ezra Taft Benson declared that the words of the living prophet took precedence over the Standard Works.
"Oaks and Maxwell replied that the prophet can preach on a wide variety of subjects."
_____
CONCLUSION: THUS SAITH THE LORD* (*CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS APPLY)
According to the secret confessions of two modern-day Mormon apostles, Dallin Oaks and Neal Maxwell, the following is actually the truth about the mechanics of Mormon prophesying:
--Joseph Smith laid down most of Mormon doctrine, so there hasn't been much need for new revelation since then.
--Some of what Smith declared to be divinely-inspired prophesy was, in fact, false.
--Other prophetic utterances that of Smith that turned out not to be true have been falsely attributed to him.
--Mormons shouldn't be keeping track of the number of false prophecies actually made by God's prophets.
--Prophesying is only a minor role for modern-day Mormon prophets.
--Since Mormon prophets have been known to prophesy falsely and with youthful, inadequate experience, they are in critical need of good counselors to help keep them from making anti-prophetic mistakes.
--Mormon apostles who don't agree with the directions given by the head Mormon prophet say they can out-vote the prophet via a majority opinion of the Quorum of Twelve.
http://twincentral.com/site/pages/art... Parts 6 and 14
| A terrifically juicy thread is unfolding on the ironically named FAIRboard. A poster named "hondo" posited the provocative question, "What Do General Authorities Do All Day?" Someone raised the issue that all of the Brethren tend to come out of high-status positions in the first place---i.e., that the "salt of the earth," rank-and-file members don't have any shot whatsoever at being called to apostlehood.
A bit into the thread, good ol' Professor Peterson reminds us about the Brethren's occupations:
Daniel Peterson wrote:
Among today's Twelve: Packer (educator), Perry (businessman), Oaks (lawyer/educator), Bednar (educator), Ballard (businessman), Uchtdorf (commercial pilot), Nelson (surgeon/educator), Wirthlin (businessman), Eyring (educator), Holland (educator), Scott (nuclear engineer), Hales (executive).
Further down, Abulafia makes this extremely interesting observation:
Abulafia wrote:
Pity that there are no office workers, caretakers, plumbers, electricians, builders there, even more of a pity that there are no carpenters, tax collectors (that one couldn't have been a popular choice at the time...how things change!!) or fishermen!! (ahem)
What is so fascinating, though, is DCP's reply:
Daniel Peterson wrote:
Why?
Are those careers somehow more holy?
Would you perhaps like to see quotas of some kind? (E.g., 25% of apostolic callings must go to blue collar workers? At least one apostle at any time should be a house painter?)
He follows this up with a stunning "admission":
Daniel Peterson wrote:
Since, in today's church, service at that level involves administrative decisions for a very complex international organization of millions of people, with a huge budget, I'm not altogether surprised that uneducated people, or people who haven't had any administrative experience or success during their secular careers, tend not to be suddenly thrust into such a role, ecclesiastically.
(emphasis added)
In other words, occupational background is key. It's not spirituality, or promptings from the Lord---it's your work background. Or at the very least, one needs "administrative experience" in order to fulfill the charges of apostleship. Later, Prof. P. tries to backtrack:
Daniel Peterson wrote:
Is there any reason why one cannot be both an administrator and a witness? If there is, I confess that I can't see it. Is there any reason to suppose that being a house painter or an office worker or a fisherman would somehow be superior to being a doctor or an educator in terms of spirituality and capacity for witness? If you think so, please outline your reasoning.
There is reason to suppose this, since none of the Brethren have been culled from the more blue-collar professions.
Daniel Peterson wrote:
Again, though, it seems to me obvious that the skills required to shepherd a multimillion member international organization might be more common among the educated and the successful than among supermarket bag boys.
The bottomline appears to be that one must have certain secular qualifications in order to serve at the highest levels in the Church.
| | | Teachings Of Heber J. Grant That Didn't Make It Into The Manual For Some Reason
Article Archived: Monday, Dec 18, 2006, at 10:10 AM
Stored Under Topic: GENERAL AUTHORITIES
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: Baura | | |
Our dear late prophet, seer and revelator Heber J. Grant understood the value of not being in debt. He preached this theme in the October 1900 general conference (each asterisk represents the letter "e" in the original):
"I went to a negro minstrel show once, and there were about ten or fifteen on the stage. One of them rushed in with his hat off and said. 'which of these here nigg*rs am lost two dollars?' holding up a two dollar bill. There hadn't any of them lost two dollars. 'Well,' he said, 'if none of you have lost it, I found these two dollars right by the door here and it is my money.' They said all right, and he put it in his pocket. No sooner had he got it in his pocket than up jumped a nigg*r and said: 'Look here, George Washington Jones, you owe me two dollars; pay your honest debts!' He handed the two dollars to him. Another nigg*r jumps up and says: 'Look here, Julius C. Brown, you owes me two dollars; pay your debt.' He got it, and in this way it went clear round. When the last man got it, up jumps George Washington Jones, and says: 'Here, give me back the two dollars; you owes me two dollar.' No sooner had he got it in his pocket than a fellow rushes in and said 'which of you nigg*rs has found two dollars?' George Washington Jones took it out of his pocket and said: 'Here, take your money and go home; we've all paid our debts.'
"I desire that the Latter-day Saints should all pay their debts."
--Heber J. Grant, October 6, 1900 (Conference Reports, October 1900, p 35-36)
|  | Oaks At Today's Stake Conference - Mormon Elite - No Answers Given - Why?
Article Archived: Monday, Jan 22, 2007, at 06:48 AM
Stored Under Topic: GENERAL AUTHORITIES
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: Grey Matter | | |
Hello Friends
Today, at a Stake Conference in Scotland, a friend approached Dallin H. Oaks, and politely asked if Oaks would answer a question.
Oaks replied, "Certainly", perhaps thinking it would be a simple one.
However, the question asked was, “In the Book of Abraham, Why does God sit on his throne with an erection, when giving out the keys of the priesthood?”
Oaks kept his composure, and simply replied, “I don’t know the answer to that question”.
In other words, Oaks confirmed that he knew of the problem relating to object 7 in facsimile # 2 in the Book of Abraham, but he did not wish to talk about why - as Mormon apologist and scholar, Michael Rhodes, tells us - the Egyptian god Min was present in the LDS scriptures with a full erection.
Of course, the correct answer would have been, “The Book of Abraham is not an authentic translation of the Egyptian papyrus Joseph Smith bought from a travelling salesman."
So, I got to thinking about Questions and Answers - or rather, lack of answers from Mormon leaders…
In general, why does a person not answer a specific question?
Possible reasons:
1. The question is not clear; therefore the person does not understand what is being asked.
2. The answer is not known.
3. The answer is known, but there is calculated intent to conceal the answer.
So far as Mormon leaders are concerned, it’s thought to be perfectly okay to:
1. Not answer questions, or to
2. Lie when answering
This culture of deceit goes back to the very roots of Mormonism. It began with Joseph and Brigham, and is still alive and well today. In fact, it was Joseph who introduced the notion that God himself Lies and encourages others to do so.
Tactic # 1
When a problem question is posed, the simplest response is to avoid the question. This can be done by not answering the question asked but by answering a different question.
This tactic has been employed for scores of years, and because it's such a very well recognised form of deception or avoidance used by politicians, criminals, etc, it tends not to work with much success anymore. Even the gullible can sense something is amiss, go on to process what has been said at a sub-concious level, and then later arrive at the point where they are aware that the question was not answered, therefore feeling dissatisfied.
Tactic # 1 is an enduring favourite among the Mormon elite.
As Boyd K. Packer once said, in quoting Henry D. Moyle, "I never pay any attention to the questions... If he doesn't ask the right questions [the questions I like to be asked], I give answers to questions he should have asked."
Packer added, "That short statement from President Moyle held great wisdom, and on a number of occasions I have been rescued in difficult situations by referring back in my mind to his comment."
[source: Boyd K. Packer, p.63, Teach Ye Diligently]
The use of this tactic is also encouraged at other levels in the Mormon organisation. Robert Millet, for example, encourages this type of deception to be practiced by Mormon missionaries.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMJvqB...
Tactic # 2
If tactic 1 does not work, the next step is often to simply tell a lie.
And whether it's:
a. Joseph Smith denying to Emma and to the public, that he was having sex with multiple girls and women (both married and unmarried),
b. The Stake fortune teller (aka patriarch) telling your friends that you've cancelled your membership because you were an adulterer - that's what was actually said about me, or
c. Gordon B. Hinckley lying to the FBI about his involvement in the Mark Hoffman affair
There are plenty of examples of lying among the Mormon elite.
You may wish to add to this thread by documenting the lies and deceptions from the Mormon holy men that you are aware of.
Tactic # 3
Another way to avoid difficult questions- and one which is constantly employed by the Mormon elite without the batting of an eyelid - is the absolute refusal to answer the question as if it had never been asked.
One example of this can be found in relation to Bob McCue's experience.
Bob McCue sent a letter to prophet seer and revelator, Jeffrey R. Holland, which talked about why Bob cancelled his membership.
Holland replied to the letter, but ignored the entire content of the letter. I don’t have a copy of Holland’s reply and would appreciate a copy if anyone has a copy.
Bob said this, about Holland’s reply:
“To my great surprise, Elder Holland responded to my first letter with a three page, warm, conciliatory reply. However, he did not address any of the substantive issues I raised, and seemed to hold the view that my return to active participation in the Mormon Church was inevitable”
[source: http://www.mccue.cc/bob/postmormon.ht... ]
Bob then sent Holland another letter, this time 80 pages long:
[Note: The links to the files below didn’t seem to work on Bob’s site for me, as I was getting a “server not found”, or “unknown zone” error, so if you have this problem, I suggest you go to the following directory on Bob’s site, and then right-click with the mouse on the desired files and select “save target as” to save the files below to your local drive. Then read them at your leisure]
http://www.mccue.cc/bob/documents/
rs.first holland lt.pdf
rs.second holland lt.pdf
Incidentally, Bob sent a letter to 9 of the 15 prophets seers and revelators. As I understand it, not one of these men answered a single question or offered a comment on any of the subjects raised by Bob.
In a recent conversation with Bob and Pheobe (from RfM), I suggested that Holland and the other apostles were simply wilful liars. Bob was generous in his opinion of them, and persuaded me that these “philosopher kings” were probably very sincere in their beliefs.
Holland - and this goes for the other special witnesses of Jesus - may be a person of high integrity, but by refusing to answer simple questions, how can I tell that he really is an "Honest John"?
There are just so many simple, simple questions that the Mormon elite refuse to answer.
Tactic # 4
The most often used tactic of Gordon B. Hinckley is the “I don’t know” response to any question he’d prefer not to answer.
The catalogue of his “I don’t know” responses to interviewers questions is now pretty hefty, and well known.
One possible reason that the Mormon leaders prefer not to answer questions is that if they choose to answer honestly, then they run the risk of:
1. Enlightening the members
2. Appearing to be stupid and ridiculous. They don’t want to end up looking like a FARMS employee - someone who is paid to contort and invent any explanation to the problems and killer questions that beleaguer the Mormon church. Many an honest soul has gone to FARMS craving support and comfort only to be utterly convinced that the church has no sensible answers to the hard questions and facts.
Of course, both of the above outcomes will result in the loss of tithe paying members.
And that's the dilemma. Lie and lose members. Tell the truth and loose members.
Those poor Mormon leaders. They're between a rock and a hard place.
| | | Seems Like The Last Collection Of General Authorities Was 99.99% Lawyers
Article Archived: Tuesday, May 15, 2007, at 08:13 AM
Stored Under Topic: GENERAL AUTHORITIES
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: dimmesdale | | |
This year's collection is primarily CEOs.
Here they are:
Brinkerhoff: Retired businessman
Chambers: director of planning and development services, City of Pocatello
Clark: Pres of BYU-Idaho
Cordova: assistant recorder, Los Angeles Temple (What?) Is this a paying job?
Merrell: CEO, Browz Group
Nattress: President Advanced Health Care Corp.
Osguthorpe: BYU Prof in instructional pshchology and Technology (finally something other than pres of a corpporation)
Price: Project manager MWH Americas Inc.
Trythall: partner Gallina LLP, Vice Pres W.F.Ranch Inc.
Wheeler: Vice Pres Snow College
Whiting: Pres. Waterhouse Inc.
Andersen: Managing partner, Andersen Investments
Archibald: Chairman of the board/president/CEO, The Black and Decker Corp
Burns: Chairman Emeritus, Ryder System Inc; developing residential/commercial property in Heber Valley Ut and Mesquite Nevada
Cook: partner/attorney, Nixon Peabody
Crittenden: executive VP/CFO American Express
Fluckiger: Attorney/Partner, Jones Day
Ingram: high school teacher (Woah! What happened here!) Pardon my cynicism, but I'll bet he'd a retired CEO, now teaching high school for a couple of years...) (Anyone know for sure?)
Melchin: Pres. Encore Communities Inc.
There they are---a real cross section of humanity. Disciples just like Jesus had---fishermen, etc.
| A few years ago Frontline (PBS) did a report on Pornography. They specifically interviewed representatives of Marriott Hotels. See http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontli....
Anyway, the representative of Marriott said that Marriott has to provide porn to its patrons to stay financially viable. The article in the link above points out that Marriott Hotels aggressively lobbies to support the porn industry. Some may defendant Marriott and say that it is controlled by a Board of Directors, and that the actual Marriott family does not have control of the corporation. That is both false and an excuse!
Why then do they put Books of Mormon in the drawers in the Hotel if the Marriotts have no control over the content of their hotel rooms? That excuse calls for a rule invoked by one of my former law professors, the "Come on Now" rule. Come on now, you can control whether the Book of Mormon is in a room, but you have no control over the myriad of porn being streamed into the rooms, or the alcohol sold downstairs, or your association with gambling casinos, or adult shows in Las Vegas?
See, the LDS heirarchy, and LDS leaders in general are very selfish and corporate. Like Nephi in the Book of Mormon, Gods laws change depending upon the circumstances. For Nephi was ok to murder to get the Brass plates... it is ok for missionaries to lie to get converts... it is ok for Brigham Young to sell alcohol in Utah... and it is ok for Marriott to sell porn and be a spokesman for the church and make the church money. See it is more and more about the bottom line. Ethics and rules are changable. It is hypocrisy at its worst.
Can you imagine if I went out and publicly started a XXX adult movie shop in my small town. I know the church would have me to a church court within a month. But, if you do it on a large scale, call it an industry practice, and make lots of money, then it is ok.
Marriott also has casinos (OOPS, what about the prophets call against gambling). They sell alcohol. Do you think it would be ok for me to go out and open a bar in my community, or would I have to see my Bishop? Or how about a strip club? See, it is all a matter of scale. The more influential you are... the more useful to the church.. the more money and influence you generate, the more God allows you to do. And we all thought God and his profit were principled, and God was unchanging.
The LDS church speaks out of both sides of its mouth. It will chastise and rebuke and demand penance from the man who sips cofee, but will look the otherway when it comes to the big money men. Really, it is hypocrital stuff like this that causes me to be more and more convinced that the church is more than ignorant about its history, it is fundamentally corrupt.
My father, the good faithful TBM dad that he is, is honest to a fault. It has cost him jobs and money. He is so honest because that is what he believes god wants. And he beleives that is what the church teaches. "You never comprimise on values," he said. He should have added, "unless the Profit of God and his corporate leaders declare otherwise."
But hey, its all business right! Hypocritical Assholes
| | | Some Of These Leaders Were "Zeros," And I Knew It At The Time
Article Archived: Wednesday, Dec 26, 2007, at 06:57 AM
Stored Under Topic: GENERAL AUTHORITIES
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
Original Author Of Article: lightfingerlouie | | |
I struggled to be a Mormon, but like so many, I failed. Looking back, I recognized what nothing burgers some of the leaders really were. But I refused to believe my own eyes. I should have known better ---sooner.
Joseph Fielding Smith always comes to mind as the leader no-one liked. If anyone did like him, they had to be related. He wrote dreadful books, changed church history, and spent a lifetime rebuking people. He was cold, mean, and humorless. I have since read that he liked to joke, but I never saw it. When he died, the church magazines had a section on his humor. I tell you, this guy could not have replaced Johnny Carson.
The man had nothing to contribute when he became the church President.
He was mean, sour, cold, and impossible to like or listen to. But when I was on my mission, I told people "I know we have a prophet today. . . ." Hell, I did not know it.
His son-in-law was another gem. If there was ever a meaner guy than Bruce McConkie, I would love to know who it was. He was, like his father-in-law, arrogant, self-righteous, and cruel. McConkie's utter destruction of George Pace was something to see. Oddly, I heard it at the time it occurred, and it left me speechless and horrfiied. I was already out of BYU, and out of the church, but I thought he had reached a new low. Come to think of it, new lows were standard fare for McConkie. I know he was a "true believer," and I know it only made him meaner.
Harold B. Lee was another major nothing burger, a man who was about as inspiring and intelligent as the cold fish he used as a role model. Looking back at the times I saw him, I am stunned I took him seriously. He had | |
