You are likely familiar with the idea that the Prophet can not lead us astray. This was an invention by Wilford Woodruff, not a revelation or scriptural quote from the word of God.
Being LDS we believe in revelation both personal and coming from the Lord through his Prophets. Thus, short of revelation coming directly from the Lord our Prophets, Seers and Revelators are speaking as men and as such we rightly must not put any more or any less stock in their words than we would any member of our own wards.
To validate my points I refer to scripture; the iron rod of the word of God we are admonished to hold to and follow inspite of any guidance offered from any other source.
O Lord, I have trusted in thee, and I will trust in thee forever, I will not put my trust in the arm of flesh. Yea, cursed is he that putteth his trust in man or maketh flesh his arm. (2 Nephi 4:34)
-That covenant, made by Nephi, is a covenant that all those who are sincere seekers after the mind and will of the Lord should make.
Those who do put their faith and trust in the arm of the flesh of GA's do so because of circular logic or circular reasoning as exemplified below:
Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord. (Jeremiah 17:5)
The weak things of the world shall come forth and break down the mighty and strong ones, that man should not counsel his fellow man, neither trust in the arm of flesh — (D&C 1:19)
Trust ye not in a friend, put ye not confidence in a guide.... (Micah 7:5)
I will not put my trust in the arm of flesh; for I know that cursed is he that putteth his trust in the arm of flesh. (2 Nephi 4:34)
Can the Prophet ever lead the church astray?
No.
Why not?
Because he's the Prophet.
How do we know that to be true?
Because the Lord will never let that happen.
Who Says so?
The Prophet says so.
Why should we believe him?
Because the Prophet will never lead the church astray.
Why not?
Because he's the Prophet.
This is the definition of Circular Reasoning according to dictionary.com:
"a use of reason in which the premises depends on or is equivalent to the conclusion, a method of false logic by which 'this is used to prove that, and that is used to prove this'; also called circular logic."
To be clear it was Wilford Woodruff who said it "I say to Israel, the Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty."
This is what the follow the leader, follow the Prophet mentality is. We are admonished to hold to the iron rod which represents the word of God according to Nephi in scripture. We are never admonished to follow mere men whatever their calling or title. In fact we are warned repeatedly to avoid relying on the Arm of the flesh. Sadly, most Mormons are unaware of this because were we to study these particular passages in Church many may begin to question the infallible authority of those who are appointed over us.As an example of this follow the leader mentality, I'll next point you to "14 fundamentals of following the Prophet." by then Elder Ezra Taft Benson during President Kimball's time. According to Kimball's son Edward, Kimball took Benson to task for espousing this follow the leader mentality that Kimball didn't want members to buy into; remember for the longest time in our history Mormons were known for their independence not for their worship of leadership.
Elder Poelman's October 1984 general conference talk was censored. He had to give it again and were it not for VCR's it would have disappeared down the memory hole. Poleman began his talk by reminding us that there is an important difference between the gospel and the Church. "There is a distinction between them which is significant", he said, "and it is very important that this distinction be understood."
Poelman cautioned that failure to distinguish between the two, and to keep each in its proper perspective and place, could lead to "confusion and misplaced priorities".
“When we understand the difference between the gospel and the church and the appropriate function of each in our lives, we are much more likely to do the right things for the right reasons.”
Elder Poelman admonished the us all to remain mindful that every church member has not only the right, but also the obligation to exercise their free agency and receive a personal witness not only of gospel principles, but also of Church practices. “In response to study, prayer and by the influence of the Holy Spirit we may seek and obtain an individual, personal witness that the principle or counsel is correct and divinely inspired.”
“As individually and collectively we increase our knowledge, acceptance, and application of gospel principles, we become less dependent on Church programs. Our lives become gospel centered.”
So it was that the entire meaning of Elder Poelman's inspired and needed talk that was perverted for the benefit of the corporate church and not for the benefit of those seeking Christ and the Father. For example, in his original talk, Elder Poelman said “it is not enough that we obey the commandments and counsel of Church leaders.”
That line was changed to “We should obey the commandments and counsel of Church leaders.”
Poelman's statement that “the orthodoxy upon which we insist must be founded in fundamental principles and eternal law, including free agency and the divine uniqueness of the individual,” became this:
“The orthodoxy upon which we insist must be founded in fundamental principles, eternal law, and direction given by those authorized in the Church.”
Every single solitary reference to free agency in the original was deleted except one, and oddly enough had been altered to imply that free agency is only effective under Church leadership and approval.
Read the two talks side by side to get a much better, albeit more disturbing understanding of what the brethren did to alter the fundamental premise of Elder Poleman's talk.
You can view the original talk here and here. If it looks wonky it is because the only copies were recorded by members, the corporate church flushed the original down the memory hole; if you want to view the fake one contact church head quarters and ask for Poleman's October 1984 talk and you'll be directed to the fake one.
Speaking of 1984 and a dystopian future of an all powerful institution that indoctrinates its people with the belief that the people exsist to serve their leaders rather than the other way around. In the novel the mantra of the people is "ignorance is strength." These people would fit right in with the members you've heard say "not everything useful is true."
However, everything that is true is useful to those who are seeking out the path back to the Father. We are encouraged in scripture to always be increasing in knowledge, that is the essence of eternal progression.
I highly recommend reading or watching Elder Poleman's talk because he says it much better than I ever could and were it not for so many members having VCR's in 1984 his original talk would have been lost forever down the memory hole.
And the reason for my weariness of the corporate church and leaders like Packer is that so often the intolerance they preached can not be backed up by scripture or by the example of the way Christ spoke to and treated those he met. That and these same leaders insist that everyone stand when they enter a room. That sounds like they demand we bow down to their authority in the same way my superiors did when I was in the Military.
Military like authoritarianism in our church is not for our benefit, it is not for the benefit of the Gospel but it clearly benefits the power and authority of the leaders. So why do we allow this?
During the early years of our church we would vote on how to conduct business and how to address policy, but no more and it has been this way since the mid 20th century.
"When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done." Improvement Era message to Ward Teachers back in 1945. "When the Prophet speaks the debate is over." First Counselor, Eldon Tanner said in 1979
John A. Widtsoe, _Evidences and Reconciliations_, p.236–39
"This is an old question. It was asked of the Prophet Joseph Smith and answered by him. He writes in his journal, "This morning . . . I visited with a brother and sister from Michigan, who thought that ‘a prophet is always a prophet'; but I told them that a prophet is a prophet only when he was acting as such" (Joseph Smith, _History of the Church_, 5:265).
"That statement makes a clear distinction between official and unofficial actions and utterances of officers of the Church. In this recorded statement the Prophet Joseph Smith recognizes his special right and duty, as the President and Prophet of the Church, under the inspiration of the Lord, to speak authoritatively and officially for the enlightenment and guidance of the Church. But he claims also the right, as other men, to labor and rest, to work and play, to visit and discuss, to present his opinions and hear the opinion of others, to counsel and bless as a member of the Church."We very much need to get back to the spirit and conduct of the church as instituted by Joseph Smith. We need that pure Mormonism that Alan Rock Waterman has been arguing in favor of for a few years now.
As Elder Poleman argues, we need to understand the difference between the church and the Gospel and guide ourselves by the Gospel, by the iron rod of God's word in scripture. And keep the institution of the corporate church in it's proper perspective as a delivery system for that Gospel. A system which is fallible no matter how many of these men profess infallibility due to their title and rank.
It seems given the censorship of Poleman's talk and much of this follow the leader mentality preached in church and consistently from the general conference pulpit, that the church is as concerned, or more concerned with, the membership worshiping them as they are concerned with us worshiping Christ.
Our Apostles and GA's are men and I don't believe any man is beyond criticism, so long as the critique isn't reduced to name calling and personal attacks and for as harsh as I was in my last piece, I stayed on point and did not make it personal.
The reason I lament such pharisitical arguments made by Elder Packer and Nelson is because such opinions are almost always used, if not intended to degrade, demean and diminish others. Those we refer to as "other" are cast out of our church and our society but to begin with they are cast out of our family because they are all our brothers and sisters whether we like it or not. Whether we like them or not they are our family and the two greatest commandments according to Jesus are to Love God with all your heart, mind body and soul; and to love your neighbor as yourself, even your enemy.
Peter once asked Jesus how many times should we forgive and Jesus tells him we are to forgive 77 times or 7 times 7 which is a way of saying infinity in the language of their day.
I get how some may find this difficult, being Christian is not easy, but to find it offensive as so many do, I find depressing and disgusting.
I mean really, what's so funny about peace, love and understanding?
Honestly?
