Important discussion! A black & white approach here leaves us vulnerable to the infallibilities, for sure. As a convert, I’ve always found it curious to wonder if converts are expected to live and know every thing said by prophets previous. Sounds a little silly to expect that, right?! But isn’t that also true for the rest…for our children, and our grandchildren. Focusing on the prophetic emphasis of our day seems to be the natural approach. Following your counsel about personal revelation seems to help us take care of the rest.
Thank you for the thoughtful view on how to navigate prophetic counsel with personal revelation. The problem as I see it is the church is willing to openly acknowledge that prophets are fallible but have created a system that punishes those who then question the prophet. How many people were punished for opposing systemic racism in the church? What about for promoting that minors should have a legal guardian present in ecclesiastical interviews? And what about “Mormon”? My whole life I was proud to be Mormon, then all of a sudden using that word is a victory for satan. Until I can truly disagree openly with the prophet I can’t really take the idea seriously that a prophet is treated as fallible.
Covid. It was concerning that individuals within our faith failed to acknowledge that counsel. I think most who wore masks and received the vaccination, in our ward experience, were in the major minority. For me, it was appalling. Not because a prophet urged us but because it should have been common sense to do those things to protect us, as individuals, and to also protect our community? I knew an individual who said, they’re taking my free agency away by telling me to wear and a mask and get vaxed. The thought ran through my mind, so you’re more worried and proud of your agency than you are about the physical welfare of your fellow man. I digressed. The point is, you don’t need revelation to exercise common sense. The prophet wasn’t saying anything that science wasn’t already providing direction on. Are we really that reliant on the words of a church leader, that most didn’t follow anyway, to provide common sense information to keep us safe? (Note: my wife did remind me that the role of a prophet is so to be a voice of warning. I think in the case of Covid, that’s exactly what that was.) Another thought occurred while reading your article. Does church leadership know that they have that kind of power of persuasion? That to me is somewhat concerning. It’s almost a vicious circle. I’m just curious, did you feel inspired to follow the prophets direction because it supported counsel that was already being shared from the scientific community, or because it came from a prophet?
Great job capturing the nuances of this difficult/easily misunderstood topic. Growing up Catholic, I was taught the Pope was infallible—an idea that seemed to extend to local clergy. Then, the Lord’s restored gospel taught me something different: prophets reveal the will of the Lord, but they are also human/imperfect. Your sources drive home this point! I would add one more; “Approaching Latter-day Saint Doctrine” (Church newsroom). The same big question is posed there—how do we know when its opinion vs the mind, will, and voice of the Lord?
From that source:
“The doctrinal tenets of any religion are best understood within a broad context, and thoughtful analysis is required to understand. A few simple principles that facilitate a better understanding:
“Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church.
“With divine inspiration, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four standard works, official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith.
“Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted. Some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines.
“…The mistake that public commentators often make is taking an obscure teaching that is peripheral to the Church’s purpose and placing it at the very center.”
That last part is referring to the media, but we do it as members too—elevate an obscure teaching or isolated statement to doctrine.
Important discussion! A black & white approach here leaves us vulnerable to the infallibilities, for sure. As a convert, I’ve always found it curious to wonder if converts are expected to live and know every thing said by prophets previous. Sounds a little silly to expect that, right?! But isn’t that also true for the rest…for our children, and our grandchildren. Focusing on the prophetic emphasis of our day seems to be the natural approach. Following your counsel about personal revelation seems to help us take care of the rest.
Thank you for the thoughtful view on how to navigate prophetic counsel with personal revelation. The problem as I see it is the church is willing to openly acknowledge that prophets are fallible but have created a system that punishes those who then question the prophet. How many people were punished for opposing systemic racism in the church? What about for promoting that minors should have a legal guardian present in ecclesiastical interviews? And what about “Mormon”? My whole life I was proud to be Mormon, then all of a sudden using that word is a victory for satan. Until I can truly disagree openly with the prophet I can’t really take the idea seriously that a prophet is treated as fallible.
Covid. It was concerning that individuals within our faith failed to acknowledge that counsel. I think most who wore masks and received the vaccination, in our ward experience, were in the major minority. For me, it was appalling. Not because a prophet urged us but because it should have been common sense to do those things to protect us, as individuals, and to also protect our community? I knew an individual who said, they’re taking my free agency away by telling me to wear and a mask and get vaxed. The thought ran through my mind, so you’re more worried and proud of your agency than you are about the physical welfare of your fellow man. I digressed. The point is, you don’t need revelation to exercise common sense. The prophet wasn’t saying anything that science wasn’t already providing direction on. Are we really that reliant on the words of a church leader, that most didn’t follow anyway, to provide common sense information to keep us safe? (Note: my wife did remind me that the role of a prophet is so to be a voice of warning. I think in the case of Covid, that’s exactly what that was.) Another thought occurred while reading your article. Does church leadership know that they have that kind of power of persuasion? That to me is somewhat concerning. It’s almost a vicious circle. I’m just curious, did you feel inspired to follow the prophets direction because it supported counsel that was already being shared from the scientific community, or because it came from a prophet?
Great job capturing the nuances of this difficult/easily misunderstood topic. Growing up Catholic, I was taught the Pope was infallible—an idea that seemed to extend to local clergy. Then, the Lord’s restored gospel taught me something different: prophets reveal the will of the Lord, but they are also human/imperfect. Your sources drive home this point! I would add one more; “Approaching Latter-day Saint Doctrine” (Church newsroom). The same big question is posed there—how do we know when its opinion vs the mind, will, and voice of the Lord?
From that source:
“The doctrinal tenets of any religion are best understood within a broad context, and thoughtful analysis is required to understand. A few simple principles that facilitate a better understanding:
“Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church.
“With divine inspiration, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four standard works, official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith.
“Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted. Some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines.
“…The mistake that public commentators often make is taking an obscure teaching that is peripheral to the Church’s purpose and placing it at the very center.”
That last part is referring to the media, but we do it as members too—elevate an obscure teaching or isolated statement to doctrine.