DiscussMormonism.com

Should we always acquiesce to whatever Church leaders ask of us?

Our own reasoning and conscience can be good guides to let us know if it is something we should be doing. All men are subject to error, so there is no holiness accrued by compounding the error. The last thing we need is for the Church to be turned into some cult of obedience. When we put our leaders on a pedestal, to be worshiped as infallible, we are doing a disservice to both them and ourselves.

Your thoughts?


.

moksha wrote:Should we always acquiesce to whatever Church leaders ask of us?
Our own reasoning and conscience can be good guides to let us know if it is something we should be doing. All men are subject to error, so there is no holiness accrued by compounding the error. The last thing we need is for the Church to be turned into some cult of obedience. When we put our leaders on a pedestal, to be worshiped as infallible, we are doing a disservice to both them and ourselves.
Your thoughts?

- when we put our leaders on a pedestal, to be worshiped as infallible
That pedestal is as high as was for Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong [Mao Tse-tung], Enver Hoxha [ɛnˈvɛɾ ˈhɔdʒa], Ceauşescu [tʃa.uˈʃes.ku]. (The last one was especially "loved" one in Hungary, because since Trianon, in Romania live many native hungarian ...)
Should I present You, where did lead their leadership in "their" countries?

- the last thing we need is for the Church to be turned into some cult of obedience
It is too late. The Church has turned into that, long ago. At this level, there is no help. Leastways I know no one.

in another thread, bcspace wrote:In other words, a lot of these are for people who can't govern themselves to the extent they must ask for guidance. There is no doctrine on the matter but the Church's opinion is such and such. If there was an actual doctrine about getting a vasectomy, I think it would be printed in a manual don't you?

You can substitute the smallprint with anything. This is the essence of Mormonism.

- The common members are people who can't govern themselves. They must ask for guidance.
To be on the safe side (if they don't ask ...) we produce them the guidance.

- There is no doctrine on the matter.
As on any matter.

- But the Church's opinion is such and such.
And it changes in every few years after some external force.

Say Thomas Monson (Yep, little Tommie Monson himself) came into your living room and said God commanded him to secretly reinstitute Polygamy and he wanted your wife for one of his and she would be free to marry him(your Temple wedding notwithstanding) because of his higher Priesthood office. Or... ... he wanted your 17 hear old daughter and it was your duty to inform her of it and that persuading her to become a wife of his would assure your salvation in the highest Kingdom of Celestial Glory in the hereafter.

Do you believe him?

Joe, the days of wanting your wife or daughter are past in the Church. Not only do we not practice polygamy, but having a much older Prophet and Apostles, helps keep the cravings of the flesh in check.

However, if other untoward circumstances involved an unbalanced Stake or Mission President calling for martyrs, to some convoluted cause, I would hope all members could be grounded firmly enough in what is right versus unquestioning obedience, that they would eschew this call for martyrdom.


.

moksha wrote:Should we always acquiesce to whatever Church leaders ask of us?

Our own reasoning and conscience can be good guides to let us know if it is something we should be doing. All men are subject to error, so there is no holiness accrued by compounding the error. The last thing we need is for the Church to be turned into some cult of obedience. When we put our leaders on a pedestal, to be worshiped as infallible, we are doing a disservice to both them and ourselves.

Your thoughts?


.

It is my impression that the "leaders" have no illusions as to how obedient the Church members are. If anything, the home teaching numbers keep them humble.

cinepro wrote:It is my impression that the "leaders" have no illusions as to how obedient the Church members are. If anything, the home teaching numbers keep them humble.

What? Can not the home teachers make up numbers?
This is the last stage. Really.

ludwigm wrote:

cinepro wrote:It is my impression that the "leaders" have no illusions as to how obedient the Church members are. If anything, the home teaching numbers keep them humble.

What? Can not the home teachers make up numbers?
This is the last stage. Really.

The numbers for home teaching are abysmal. Truly, 'way down in the abyss. In other words: bad. If they're making up numbers, they've got a lot to learn.

Older patient:
- Doctor! My friends of same age say they can do twice a week. And I can do it only once in two months. What should I do?
- Say them "on alternate days" !

(As far as it was translated correctly ...)

I thought this was a thread about the press and Obama.

I don't think anyone in the Church follows blindly. At some points, everyone does a gut check, receives confirmation, and continues on.

The numbers for home teaching are abysmal. Truly, 'way down in the abyss. In other words: bad. If they're making up numbers, they've got a lot to learn.

If it were me, I'd abolish home teaching to all except shut-ins. I would replace it with a monthly pot-luck after fast Sunday services are over.