Apparently God has not found a prophet in our day that he couldn’t live with. He zealously allows free agency in others when we might wish otherwise.

Charles Rogers

In many ways, yes.

Excommunicated members basically don’t follow the “rules”. They are, however, still welcome to come to church, etc. but are prohibited from participating in certain ways.

In any public internet forum, there are also certain “rules”, largely unwritten. Generally, posts should be on topic and pertinent. While differences of opinion are actually encouraged for the sake of enlightening each other, personal attacks or snide comments are generally discouraged.

It would be nice to be able to “excommunicate” people who don’t follow the “rules”. They could still attend (“lurking”) but would have restrictions. That way, they couldn’t make comments until they learned to make constructive comments and not be so annoying.

Or perhaps they may find the excommunication process so bothersome that they find another faith (or website). There are hundreds and thousands out there.

You address something really important when you ask: “And why would someone avoid saying that a previous prophet was in error, if not to preserve the illusion that they are never wrong?”

I believe this is the ultimate opportunity for future leaders to help establish the kingdom of God on earth and truly help the church move forward globally. Honesty is perhaps one of the ultimate virtues that we lack when we present ourselves in a historical context. I don’t think this lack of honesty is ill intended, but I do think it reflects a lack of courage, faith and integrity on our part (speaking as a Church in general, but the obvious focus is the leadership).

Inevitably, I have to echo the Adam-God doctrine. This teaching was originated by Brigham Young per the accounts available. He promoted it strongly, even when some apostles rejected the idea. He made sure it was taught during the lecture at the veil, at the culprit of the temple endowment. He considered a basic pillar of knowledge revealed to the saints of the last dispensation. For a long time, the Church made efforts to make people believe Brigham was “misquoted” or “misinterpreted,” or that the doctrine was a transcript error, etc, etc, etc. As more scholars studied the matter, it became evident by numerous accounts of faithful members (including a poem by Eliza R. Snow) and journals like that of William Clayton, that the doctrine was a legitimate teaching of Brigham. Today the doctrine is undeniable and I don’t think the Church would be able to claim today that it is a simple “misunderstanding.”

The church has declared the doctrine to be wrong. McConkie stated it is a “heresy.” Of course, this was during the period the church denied Brigham actually taught it. Yet, later McConkie accepted in a more private setting that indeed Brigham taught the doctrine.

We say the Lord won’t let the prophet lead the church astray, yet, the Adam-God doctrine, along with the anxiety created by Brigham Young that only those living in a polygamous relationship would be able to receive exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom led large groups of people to split from the Church.

These bizarre and extreme doctrines were in part contributors to the Mormon alienation from the US government, and were also central factors for the RLDS movement.

Later, when polygamy was ceased, the anxiety that the church was falling from the truth was at the center of the FLDS movement. Therefore, I think Brigham’s teachings are responsible, if only in part but responsible nonetheless, for a great number of good members and good families and generations of people to have lost the truth.

I agree with you that this has indeed been how the Church has handled information previously. They seem to want to create an illusion that the prophets were never wrong, and that everything somehow, “sometimes beyond our understanding,” had its rightful place. But I think it is slowly changing. It will change only to the extent that our current leaders let it change. And that is where I see a major opportunity for future leaders to help the church go forth successfully.

Publications such as Bushman’s Rough Stone Rolling, have, if in small proportions, helped cross that bridge the current generation of leaders seem to fear so much: historic honesty. I have heard he (Bushman) is also involved in helping the CES (or whatever it is called today) teach without having to resort to speculative apologetics, which is often the source for the perpetuation of many of the speculations that are no longer supported by church leaders.

I always advocate honesty. And when trying to understand our leaders, I advocate exercising our gift of receiving the divine guidance of the Holy Ghost. But I think humility is possibly the key to truly receiving guidance. Not only humility to accept that we are wrong, but also humility to love our leaders and remain steadfast even when we discover our leaders were wrong. God can give us the strength we need, and we must not need to feel let down.

There are several problems in hand and I think this is in part why the leaders act the way they do. While it is clear to me that our leaders fear criticism; they fear the reputation of the church offices will be tarnished; they probably also fear members are not strong enough spiritually to accept fallible leaders on one hand, and on the other hand, they fear some members may find easy justifications for their sins by simply making light of anything the leaders say.

This combination of fears seems to be in my opinion the root cause of the current way they handle information. “If we are not actively teaching it, it is not doctrine.” Which again IMO is extremely problematic. Some people don’t let go of things that the Church has apparently (though not clearly) let go. To the average member, it is very hard to be clearly aware of every single thing that the church is still teaching, and those things that seem to be slipping into the past. This also allows for the Church to be historically unrepentant of things done, and hopeful that wrong doctrines will simply fade with time and not be remembered: a concept I consider contrary to what we teach regarding repentance. It doesn’t compel the Church leaders to do “everything they can” to correct the heartache and spiritual damage that the false doctrines caused. Not to mention it doesn’t provide a real solution for the perpetuation of false doctrines among circles in the church, which is probably the most evident problem today.

Contrary to what someone stated here, I do believe we can be worthy of Holy Ghost more often than not, and that His help is especially available and reassuring when we are struggling with something that the leaders have commanded. I think this divine guidance is the key to this discussion.

Another thing that is fair to mention, and has been mentioned by some here, is that these things are the exception and not the rule. Our leaders teach us specific ways in which we can be like Christ, and of course, we don’t need to make a spiritual struggle out of everything that they say.

For the most part, they encourage us to live like Christ, to keep the commandments, to pray and diligently study the scriptures, to extend our selfish vision, to provide service and be charitable and to make Christ the center of our lives. Things that most of us still fail at doing with consistency, and thus we need to be constantly reminded. In this context, I fully support the stance that Church leaders are there to be obeyed. I have come across so many people who make all sorts of rationalized excuses for holding on to some form of sin, or to hold on to a habit that trumps their progress.

There is still room for improvement on everyone’s part. I believe we are the ones who make things happen. I believe we need to let our leaders know that we are worthy and capable of handling truth, and that the hurtful things that past leaders have said must be acknowledged and specifically clarified, corrected, or repudiated if necessary, through the right venues (PBS documentaries not being one of the right venues). Hopefully future leaders are taking note.

You seem to be yawning a lot. Maybe you need to get more sleep? :)

:)