New First Presidency of the church

Public forum for those seeking support for their experience in the LDS Church.
User avatar
On Own Now
Posts: 1544
Joined: 18 Jan 2012, 12:45

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by On Own Now » 16 Jan 2018, 15:00

Some thoughts:

- Replacing DFU with DHO in the FP doesn't really bode well as we look forward to two new Apostles in April. I expect that they will be a bit less open and a bit more retrench-oriented than we might have hoped.

- I note that RMN put the oldest Apostles into all the main positions. The following are the only Apostles older than 77:

RMN (93) Church President
MRB (89) Acting President of the Twelve
DHO (85) 1st Counselor in the FP
HBE (84) 2nd Counselor in the FP

I find this to be telling of RMN as a traditionalist. It may be that in his mind, the Church was at it's best when these guys were in their prime: the early 1970's.

- The average age of the two Counselors in the FP: 84.5. Think of all the people in their mid-80's who you know and their mental state and physical stamina. The average age of all members of the FP: 87.3.
"Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but resolve instead never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of another." --Romans 14:13

kate5
Posts: 77
Joined: 21 Feb 2016, 22:49

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by kate5 » 16 Jan 2018, 15:57

"I believe in the system of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I have confidence that their flaws are smoothed by their interactions with each other and with those they serve. Over time the branches of the tree that produce the most bitter fruit are being pruned. We are becoming more perfect as a church. We will continue to do so until we are fully acceptable to God. Those of us who will, will join into a fellowship with God. We will live as he lives and experience the joy of doing the work he does."

Rich Alger,
Just curious, are you trying to say that anyone who is upset with President Uchtdorf not getting put back into the First Presidency are "bitter fruit" who need to be pruned? If so, then I'm sure you will enjoy your homogenous church where everyone thinks and believes the same. To each his own.

User avatar
On Own Now
Posts: 1544
Joined: 18 Jan 2012, 12:45

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by On Own Now » 16 Jan 2018, 16:21

kate5,

FWIW, I took Rich Alger's comment about pruning the tree to refer to flaws in the Church (ex: practice of polygamy, 1890... women not allowed to speak in SM, late 1960's... the Ban, 1978... closed access to historical information, 2005+). When I read it again, I'm not 100% sure, but that was my initial take on it.
"Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but resolve instead never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of another." --Romans 14:13

User avatar
DarkJedi
Posts: 5721
Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 20:53

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by DarkJedi » 16 Jan 2018, 17:59

Let's not make any mistake. This move marginalizes Uchtdorf. The FP speaks about 3 times each in GC. The Q12 each speak only once.
In the absence of knowledge or faith there is always hope.

Once there was a gentile...who came before Hillel. He said "Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot." Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it."

My Introduction

kate5
Posts: 77
Joined: 21 Feb 2016, 22:49

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by kate5 » 16 Jan 2018, 18:06

On Own Now,

Thank you for your perspective. You could very well be right about the intention of that post. I did react quickly and harshly without trying to fully understand what he was stating.

I just have a hard time understanding how taking President Uchtdorf out of the First Presidency could be working towards getting rid of bitter fruit. It seems that the First Presidency we have now would be much more likely to keep those flawed aspects of the church in whereas I believe President Uchtdorf was much more likely to try to prune the frustrating issues out.

This has been a very hard day for me. After this, the only reason I am going to church every week is because of family issues. I am forced to "StayLds" at least for now. But I very heartbroken that, in my view, the most Christlike leader of the church has been stripped of a lot of his ability to change the status quo. He didn't deserve that and neither do we.

User avatar
On Own Now
Posts: 1544
Joined: 18 Jan 2012, 12:45

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by On Own Now » 16 Jan 2018, 22:43

DarkJedi wrote:
16 Jan 2018, 17:59
Let's not make any mistake. This move marginalizes Uchtdorf. The FP speaks about 3 times each in GC. The Q12 each speak only once.
Yeah, you are right. Also, FP members CONDUCT GC meetings. Collectively, they are the face of the Church.

It was interesting to me, during the announcement, DFU didn't look comfortable.

It is entirely possible that this was no intended slight "putting in his place"... after all, when I was the Deacon's Quorum President, I picked my own counselors and didn't give any thought to who had been in before. However, I do think it is likely that the membership of the Church will subconsciously downgrade DFU in their own minds because of this.
kate5 wrote:
16 Jan 2018, 18:06
heartbroken
I feel that way, too.
"Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but resolve instead never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of another." --Romans 14:13

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 15779
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by Curt Sunshine » 16 Jan 2018, 23:07

Fwiw, historically, the general practice has been like the current situation: the senior members of the 12 serving in the FP, with an "acting president" of the Q12. Elder Uchtdorf was a notable exception.

Yes, this is a move toward a more traditional construction, but I don't see it as a radical move, just because the general practice has been to leave the FP counselors in place. I see two competing general practices,with the traditional one being chosen. Frankly, that doesn't surprise me at all, and I also see a "Prophet-in-Training" historical model that would necessitate including Elder Oaks.

Sure, I would prefer listening to Elder Uchtdorf more in General Conference, but I am okay with this FP. President Nelson is the real issue for me - but so was President Benson, and he was much mellower as President than he was prior to that change. I don't have active faith that the same will be said of President Nelson, but I am willing to wait and see.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

User avatar
Beefster
Posts: 485
Joined: 04 Aug 2017, 18:38

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by Beefster » 16 Jan 2018, 23:21

I'll admit I'm sad about Uchtdorf not being in the FP anymore and I'm bracing myself for DHO, but perhaps there's a silver lining in all this.

I don't think we really know all the sides to RMN and DHO. RMN has never really rubbed me the wrong way and he has always had good variety in his talks. DHO has a methodical approach to his talks where he clearly lays out his points and numbers them and with 1/3 or less of his GC time spent on the proclamation (hopefully), we will probably hear him talk about other, more important, things than traditional marriage. I'm not super bothered by him, but he's definitely been a broken record up to this point.

True, RMN and DHO don't speak to me like DFU, HBE, and JRH do, but this isn't the end of the world. They're all good men. But we don't answer to them. We answer to our own consciences.
Boys are governed by rules. Men are governed by principles.

Often I hear doubt being presented as the opposite of faith but I think certainty does a better job of filling that role. Doubts can help faith grow, certainty almost always makes faith shrink. --nibbler

AmyJ
Posts: 576
Joined: 27 Jul 2017, 05:50

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by AmyJ » 17 Jan 2018, 08:06

Curt Sunshine wrote:
16 Jan 2018, 23:07
President Nelson is the real issue for me - but so was President Benson, and he was much mellower as President than he was prior to that change. I don't have active faith that the same will be said of President Nelson, but I am willing to wait and see.
I am hopeful about President Nelson. We got the pleasure of hearing him speak in our stake in October after President Monson was visibly getting weaker and shifting most of his responsibilities to the other apostles. While I thought his remarks in our stake conference were rather generic (but endearing and funny), the overarching sense I had from the experience was that he was aware that greater burdens would fall his way and he was preparing to step into those shoes as it were. He gave off wanting to know and interact with us more than I had ever seen before in his talks. My husband reported on the Priesthood Leadership Session he was able to attend - and what President Nelson said in that meeting is continuing to influence and shape my husband's thoughts and behaviors to become a better husband and father - that was a HUGE part of that message.

User avatar
On Own Now
Posts: 1544
Joined: 18 Jan 2012, 12:45

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by On Own Now » 17 Jan 2018, 09:54

Curt Sunshine wrote:
16 Jan 2018, 23:07
Fwiw, historically, the general practice has been like the current situation: the senior members of the 12 serving in the FP, with an "acting president" of the Q12. Elder Uchtdorf was a notable exception.
That's not entirely accurate when you take into account when these men were added to the FP. It probably seems that way, because FP members move up in seniority over time. Here's a quick analysis of the position of the guys that got put in as FP counselors starting with the 1st/2nd counselors who were in those positions 50 years ago.

1968: 1st counselor was HBBrown. When he was put into the FP, he was 13th in line for the presidency.

1968: 2nd counselor was NLTanner. Just like HBB, when NLT was put in he was 13th in line.

1970: HBLee was added as a counselor and he was next in line.

1972: MGRomney added. At the time, he was fifth in line.

1981: GBH added. At the time, he was in the bell-curve of the quorum... he was sixth in line.

1985: TSM added. He was fourth in line.

1995: JEFaust added. He was fifth in line.

2007: HBE added. He was tenth in line.

2008: DFU added. He was 11th in line.

2018: DHO added. He is next in line.

The average position in seniority of these people when they were added to the FP over the last half century: seventh in line.

Four of the last six Presidents never served in the FP prior to becoming Prophet/President: SWK, ETB, HWH, RMN.
"Let us therefore no longer pass judgment on one another, but resolve instead never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of another." --Romans 14:13

Post Reply