Historians have usurped the prophets

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

When, in your opinion, did consensus occur? ( I realize this is just a guess ).

From the very first moment that SWK voiced what he had been feeling.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by tooblue

From the very first moment that SWK voiced what he had been feeling.

Do you think HBL was the last apostle who opposed it (by all accounts)?

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Do you think HBL was the last apostle who opposed it (by all accounts)?

I think it is naive to think the issue had not been raised many times before SWK was called as an apostle. Is it fair to say that any apostle opposed it? Would it be more correct to say they disagreed with it, and that the disagreement needed to be voiced.

Ultimately how much did any of them oppose the reversal of the ban? I am a contrarian by nature. It is not hard for me to take a contrary position on any subject (see evolution). I am in no way comparing myself to HBL, merely stating that I can empathise with the disagreeing voice.

[UtahDan]

I think this is one of the toughest subjects for people to synthesize for all the reasons described in this thread. I think that the reality takes the clothes off the emperor for many people and this leads them to abandon their common sense, both in the pursuit of keeping the clothes on and in overreacting to what it means that the emperor forgot to get dressed today.

I may be the odd person out, but to me learning that our leaders are inspired but imperfect men who disagree, argue, wrestle with the right answer and find it together through inspiration is, well, inspiring. This is the same reason that all I have learned about Joseph Smith inspires. He didn't levitate from epiphany to epiphany but was a mortal man with mortal passions and mortal foibles. And yet, through such a man God was able to bring able this good church that teaches so much good and provides so much opportunity to do good. If he can do it through him, perhaps he can work good through me even though I am imperfect, vexed by my passions, and somewhat contentious in my heart as I believe he was.

The message I take away is that I can do it to in spite of what I am, not that I have to be some fictional unattainable someone else. The apple cannot be stuck back on the Tree of Knowledge; once we begin to see, we are doomed and challenged to seek the strength to see more, not less.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I think this is one of the toughest subjects for people to synthesize for all the reasons described in this thread. I think that the reality takes the clothes off the emperor for many people and this leads them to abandon their common sense, both in the pursuit of keeping the clothes on and in overreacting to what it means that the emperor forgot to get dressed today.

I may be the odd person out, but to me learning that our leaders are inspired but imperfect men who disagree, argue, wrestle with the right answer and find it together through inspiration is, well, inspiring. This is the same reason that all I have learned about Joseph Smith inspires. He didn't levitate from epiphany to epiphany but was a mortal man with mortal passions and mortal foibles. And yet, through such a man God was able to bring able this good church that teaches so much good and provides so much opportunity to do good. If he can do it through him, perhaps he can work good through me even though I am imperfect, vexed by my passions, and somewhat contentious in my heart.

The message I take away is that I can do it to in spite of what I am, not that I have to be some fictional unattainable someone else. The apple cannot be stuck back on the Tree of Knowledge; once we begin to see, we are doomed and challenged to seek the strength to see more, not less.

Well said, Dan. I completely agree. I don't recall much shock or surprise when reading the DOM book regarding dissent within the church leadership. Perhaps I have seen enough of the church bureaucracy that I never believed in the "unanimity" model that Mike alludes to. I find it quite comforting that they have vigorous, spirited debates with lots of give and take. It means that they are likely to have a good balance of inspiration and rational thought in their decisions.

[MikeWaters]

I have never seen a spirited debate in any church meeting that I have been a part of, which includes bishopric meetings, PEC, Ward Council under two different bishops.

The times I didn't agree with prevailing opinion, I may or may not have said something, and if I was shot down, hey I'm just the secretary, shut my mouth. Of course there were times when my opinion was not sought.

I think if I were Bishop, given my nature to want to explore various sides of issues, I would want counselors who would be pretty vigorous in their opinions. But also shut the hell up when I put my hands together on top of the desk.

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I may be the odd person out, but to me learning that our leaders are inspired but imperfect men who disagree, argue, wrestle with the right answer and find it together through inspiration is, well, inspiring. This is the same reason that all I have learned about Joseph Smith inspires. He didn't levitate from epiphany to epiphany but was a mortal man with mortal passions and mortal foibles. And yet, through such a man God was able to bring able this good church that teaches so much good and provides so much opportunity to do good. If he can do it through him, perhaps he can work good through me even though I am imperfect, vexed by my passions, and somewhat contentious in my heart as I believe he was.

The message I take away is that I can do it to in spite of what I am, not that I have to be some fictional unattainable someone else. The apple cannot be stuck back on the Tree of Knowledge; once we begin to see, we are doomed and challenged to seek the strength to see more, not less.

Excellent. Very well put UD.

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I have never seen a spirited debate in any church meeting that I have been a part of, which includes bishopric meetings, PEC, Ward Council under two different bishops.

A few years ago I was in charge of ward activities and they made me attend a meeting once a month with all the auxillary leaders. I didn't attend very often, but when I did the RS and YW presidents would fillet the bishop. The debate was definitely spirited. When one of them would disagree with the bishop, they would tag team him into submission. He didn't stand a chance against them. It was pretty entertaining.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I have never seen a spirited debate in any church meeting that I have been a part of, which includes bishopric meetings, PEC, Ward Council under two different bishops.

The times I didn't agree with prevailing opinion, I may or may not have said something, and if I was shot down, hey I'm just the secretary, shut my mouth. Of course there were times when my opinion was not sought.

I think if I were Bishop, given my nature to want to explore various sides of issues, I would want counselors who would be pretty vigorous in their opinions. But also shut the hell up when I put my hands together on top of the desk.

Yeah, but keep in mind that many of the quorum have a wealth of leadership experience in executive positions, academic institutions, and on boards of companies. This is not a bunch of timid rum-of-the-mill saints trying to stay awake at a boring Sunday morning meeting.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I have never seen a spirited debate in any church meeting that I have been a part of, which includes bishopric meetings, PEC, Ward Council under two different bishops.

The times I didn't agree with prevailing opinion, I may or may not have said something, and if I was shot down, hey I'm just the secretary, shut my mouth. Of course there were times when my opinion was not sought.

I think if I were Bishop, given my nature to want to explore various sides of issues, I would want counselors who would be pretty vigorous in their opinions. But also shut the hell up when I put my hands together on top of the desk.

I have been part of leadership groups where there have been quite vigorous debates both about matters of doctrine, meaning study of the scriptures within the group, as well as a matter of policy and application within the unit in question. But, when the leader made a decision, the discussion was over and we moved on. I don't think this is so uncommon.