When to question the Prophet?

[All-American]

The other thread poses an interesting question: when and how is it appropriate for a faithful member of the church to question the prophet? I'm going to trample around the outside of the pit for a second to see if we can't get to the heart of the matter, starting with aspects in which I believe it is appropriate to question.

It should go without saying that the priority in asking these questions ought to be compliance with God's will, and not merely justifying one's own desires when they apparently run counter to the teachings of the prophet. (No finger pointing, please.)

For example:

Did the prophet really say or teach this?

This seems rather obvious-- if I told you that President Hinckley instructed church members to do some task that seemed somewhat outlandish, you would at least want a reference to know that it was, in fact, HIM who said it. Even so, I am often surprised how often conversations come up wherein the prophet it cited as advocating something which he didn't, so far as I was able to tell.

Did the prophet really mean this?

In other words, what is the context of statement? Is he saying what I believe he is saying? What is the principle or idea that he is trying to teach?

Is this man really a prophet?

Any Mormon who has ever stood at a pulpit and claimed to know that Gordon B. Hinckley is a prophet had better have some explanation of how they know it. So long as testimony is based on the confirmation of the spirit when one prays to ask if the church is true, or if the Book of Mormon is true, or if Joseph Smith was a prophet, Latter-day Saints have a right to ask this question, too.

Is what the prophet teaches (and intends to be taught-- re: question #2) true? Or, is his action in accordance with God's will?

A shakier question, here. Opinion will probably divide here; my opinion is, as long as the prophet is fallible, this is a legitimate question. I would have to do a lot of soul-searching before ever answering "no" to this question.

When, then, holding the original premise that one is still trying in all sincerity to comply with God's will, is it NOT appropriate to question the prophet?

[BlueHair]

It's my opinion that if you are truly a believer, you don't need to worry too much about whether the prophet is right or not. It doesn't seem like there has been anything new in a long time. If GBH got up and started teaching something new that sounded outlandish, that would be the time to question things.

If you are not so sure in your beliefs, I think you have to question everything. To me, the faster you come to grips with your belief or unbelief, the better. If questioning leads you to become a strong believer, you will be more comfortable with the commitment required. If it leads you down the path of unbelief, you will have wasted less time and energy.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

It's my opinion that if you are truly a believer, you don't need to worry too much about whether the prophet is right or not. It doesn't seem like there has been anything new in a long time. If GBH got up and started teaching something new that sounded outlandish, that would be the time to question things.

If you are not so sure in your beliefs, I think you have to question everything. To me, the faster you come to grips with your belief or unbelief, the better. If questioning leads you to become a strong believer, you will be more comfortable with the commitment required. If it leads you down the path of unbelief, you will have wasted less time and energy.

I believe you just described what we call "the spirit of discernment."

[Archaea]

In today's world, I doubt we'll see the President ever require something outlandish. At most, we might see something "dated" but for the most part, we are so "corporate" and "PC" that fears of something outlandish are unfounded.

It seems more we lack imagination, as opposed to Joseph Smith, who was perhaps the most innovative and charismatic modern era religious person the world may ever know. He broke with many of the traditions and set "new" standards.

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by Archaea

In today's world, I doubt we'll see the President ever require something outlandish. At most, we might see something "dated" but for the most part, we are so "corporate" and "PC" that fears of something outlandish are unfounded.

It seems more we lack imagination, as opposed to Joseph Smith, who was perhaps the most innovative and charismatic modern era religious person the world may ever know. He broke with many of the traditions and set "new" standards.

Well said.

[JohnnyLingo]

Say this October President Hinckley stands up and says we're all going back to Jackson County.

Your reaction?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

Say this October President Hinckley stands up and says we're all going back to Jackson County.

Your reaction?

Won't happen. We will not see anything startling with a corporate minded church. Those things would be made through a creeping mindset. The startling announcement won't happen.

If it did, one would look at it in context. All things must be considered in context. I'm not certain the Church still believes in the Jackson County apocalyptic stuff any longer. We have shied away from it.

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Won't happen. We will not see anything startling with a corporate minded church. Those things would be made through a creeping mindset. The startling announcement won't happen.

If it did, one would look at it in context. All things must be considered in context. I'm not certain the Church still believes in the Jackson County apocalyptic stuff any longer. We have shied away from it.

See but that's my point. You're so damn sure that NOTHING OF THE SORT WILL EVER HAPPEN that if it ever did, you'd have a hard time reconciling your preconceived notions and what reality is.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

See but that's my point. You're so damn sure that NOTHING OF THE SORT WILL EVER HAPPEN that if it ever did, you'd have a hard time reconciling your preconceived notions and what reality is.

Actually, my system is designed to react to change, but I know a lot better than you'll likely ever know how large organizations change, and sudden is not an adverb used to change large organizations.

If somehow somebody figures out a way, I'll say, "Cool, something novel for once."

Anticipation of matters in light of tradition is something my epistemology deals with nicely. Ambiguity is part of life, even if changes modify expectations.

However, I'm certain given your lack of awareness as evidenced by your posts of your traditions and the methodology of large organizations and their operational dynamics, you won't know where the changes will occur.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

Say this October President Hinckley stands up and says we're all going back to Jackson County.

Your reaction?

As long as I don't have to walk, I'd be ok with it.