17 Comments | leave a comment | RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback |
Nothing but admiration for the Pope’s decision. I think it is extremely rare in today’s age (or any) for someone to give up power/titles/responsibilities. In my mind, it is a true example of someone putting the greater good of an organization over oneself. I would love to see a mechanism in our own Church for allowing people with physical or mental issues to gracefully “retire”. It would also be nice if the Twelve could choose the next leader, as opposed to defaulting to just the one who has been around the longest. I think this could introduce some more dynamism into the leadership. But I won’t hold my breath. |
Mike S. – Where is the double “Like” button? |
I’m glad they don’t vote. It emphasizes that President of the Church isn’t a career choice, or political. I have always thought part of the point of the 15 men is that they lift and support each other, working together as part of a whole. They are able to balance out individual’s infirmities and weaknesses in a spirit of cooperation and unity rather than jostling for position. |
#3 SilverRain: I agree that it “isn’t a career choice, or political”, but it’s also not as “non-political” as we perhaps commonly represent. Given the strict hierarchical nature of the Church, it is natural that people “vie” for certain positions, even if it’s not a career choice. And it exists at ALL levels. I know people who have quit working in temples because the ordinance workers consider themselves “above” those who work in the baptistery. I saw elders on my mission who were “gunning” for leadership positions. I know people in my ward and stake who are “running for bishop”. And I know it takes place in higher levels of the Church. I agree – it isn’t necessarily a career choice or politics, but at the same time, some people get their own type of satisfaction based on their level in the hierarchy. There are certain ordinances that we don’t talk about much which are generally only offered to people of a certain level (or family members of church leaders). There are rewards. And I wouldn’t necessarily look at it as a “vote”, but perhaps not as strict as we have. Obviously, it should always be the Lord’s choice and by inspiration (much like the Catholics talk about), but I think it would do wonders if Elder Uchtdorf was perhaps made the Church president before his default level in the hierarchy. And this would be both for members as well as for the world. Again, I don’t think it will ever change as we are too ingrained. It would take a President who, like the Pope, is willing to step down and could NEVER happen from a level below that. And even in the Catholic Church it’s been centuries since someone actually did it. |
I agree it’s more political than people realize, but isn’t that an argument for not allowing voting. Why add more politics into it. How is a new member of the 12 picked? If picked by the prophet, you would want to vote for a prophet who is likely to pick a member of the 12 who would be disposed to vote for you for prophet? I understand the appeal of voting, it would get younger prophets in there who may be closer to the grassroot concerns of church members, but I think voting is too radical of a change. I think they could allow emeritus status based on individual circumstances though. |
Mike S, Anyone that wants to be bishop deserves it. |
Steve Benson likes to tell anyone who will listen as often as possible that he was already most of the way out when the whole ETB thing happened. He’s made himself into a bit of a celebrity among a surprisingly insular community of online ex-mormons. |
I think the Pope has shown a great example of humility, and would like to see our leadership do the same. To me it seems obvious that the prophet should be chosen on merit. He should be the person who can change the Church so it helps the memebership of the church come to the Gospel of Christ. I would agree this is Pres Uchtdorf. The Lord when talking to the three Nephites set the age of retirement for Apostles was 72. I realise this excludes Uchtdorf but perhaps medical progress allows this to be raised to 80? We have another problem. There has developed a culture that says complete agreement among the 15 is require for progress. So one person who opposes change can prevent progress. The members are encouraged to “hasten the work”, how about the 15 being humble enough to realise some of them are an impediment to hasteneing anything. Perhaps a younger, more dynamic, leadership could lead, and appeal to/communicate with, the whole range of memebers and potential members as well. |
Not sure of my facts, but I think the whole emeritus thing came up when one of the prophets was senile. I’m senile myself, so I don’t remember the exact situation, but there was one prophet that was kind of scary old. I think they kept him home a lot. |
Colbert was in rare form covering this…’twas an awesome show! To paraphrase, ” god has a way of letting the pope know when it’s time to retire. It’s called death! |
There have been plenty of customs, policies and practices of the church that I have questioned. But the investiture of the Q of 12 with divine authority to not only run the church, but to call their replacements and to present to us who the new prophet should be is part and parcel of the foundation and foundational truths of the church and the restored gospel. If they are all prophets, seers and revelators, they are entitled to know the Lord’s will as to who replacement apostles and prophets are supposed to be. “The church is built on the foundation of prophets and apostles.” If they collectively say it is the next senior apostle, I will sustain them. If they collectively say it is to be a different member of their quorum who is to be prophet, I will sustain them. |
The emeritus idea came out in the 20′s with Elder B.H. Roberts suggesting the idea. Being a member of the Twelve or in the First Presidency from about 1900-1950′s would have been a burden you wouldn’t want your worst enemy to have. The Assistants to the Twelve came out in 1941 to relieve some of the pressure and workload, Seventies were ordained High Priests in 1961 to further reduce the strain and local seventies were done away with in the 1980′s. |
The recent SL Trib article on this topic suggests that this has already happened, sort of. The idea is that after some medical difficulties President Kimball had serious changes in personality and mental status. During a period of lucidity President Kimball called Gordon Hinckley as a 3rd councilor in the First Presidency (as the other two were pretty old as well) and basically put him in charge. President Kimball remained in office formally, but President Hinckley shouldered all of the day to day duties of the First Presidency. |
That was during my mission. A few of the GAs who visited my mission at the time said Hinckley was so busy he had no time to even exchange pleasantries on the phone. It must have been a very tough time. |
Where I live there is an attitude among members that once a person has held a high position in the church, that person can never be called to a position that is lower. They also believe they are more worthy members than those who don’t get called to high positions in the church. Not making this up. If I could move I would. |
Ah, JR, you must be in the same ward as my parents. |
That’s crazy. We have a buttload of former bishops in my ward and they all serve in callings lower than bishop. There’s no way around that, unless you just want all former bishops to have no calling at all. They can’t all be stake presidents. |