I was listening to John Dehlin’s interview of Kate Kelly this past week, and they brought up an interesting point that I wanted to discuss more openly. In the last 5 minutes of part 2,
John, “Some people are speculating that there’s a power vacuum in the Church right now, that….”
Kate Kelly interrupts, “Some people on NPR are speculating….”
John chuckles, “Yeah. Well early 1990s, my cousin Ezra Taft Benson was incapacitated. His grandson Steve Benson acknowledged this publicly and many say that it was during this vacuum where he was sort of an invalid that Boyd K. Packer asserted himself and began excommunicating people. I’ve probably talked to 50 people who work directly with the church in some significant capacity who all confirm that President Monson has some form of dementia and that unless he’s got handlers around him, and unless he’s reading a speech, he’s unmanageable and incoherent, and you know that doesn’t mean he can’t be friendly to a child and wink to a crowd or wiggle his ears or read a teleprompter, but in terms of really managing the church, he’s over 90. He’s past his capacity given dementia. Do you ever think about that stuff and that might might be why–you know if the prophet’s not speaking, it can’t be Boyd K. Packer that responds to you, but if the prophet’s not able to even think about it, let alone really respond to it, thus we don’t have statements from the Brethren, and thus we get statements from PR, and is it possible that it’s this power vacuum where someone like a Ballard or a Clayton might feel empowered to come after a you or a me, when otherwise a strong leader wouldn’t allow that?”
Kate, “Yeah, I mean I don’t know. I don’t know if that’s true, I don’t know how much it negatively affects him. I know that people over 90, I mean people don’t live forever, so eventually he will lose capacity even if that’s not the case now, that’s just like a fact of biology.”
John agrees, “Yeah.”
Kate, “So no one can argue against that. That’s going to happen if it’s not happening now. So I think the church needs to be able to respond. I mean there are fifteen people who are leading the Church, the prophet is at the head. I would hope that that wouldn’t create, you know, an opportunity for people to do nefarious things, but that the Lord would continue to direct his work. I think You know there maybe should be a way for them to compassionately step down once they’re no longer able to say, you know like the Pope. The Pope stepped down and said I can’t do it. They are human. Every Mormon knows that the prophet is not infallible and not a superhero, and so I think there should be a place for them to cry out if that’s the case. I don’t know if that exists, but I don’t know.
I think again this goes back to my view of the Zion, that it’s not just one person who comes up with an idea totally unattached from anything else that’s happening in the world. I think this criticism comes from some people who say now’s just not the time. Maybe later, maybe when President Monson dies and there’s a younger person in there, there will be more of an opportunity. You really need to pay more attention to the inner machinations of the church, but I’m saying now’s the time because now’s the time for us. Women are suffering. So now’s the time when people say, and whether it’s going to change after President Monson dies, I don’t know, but the person taking over for him is also going to be very old, and so that’s just the way the current structure of the Church is, so I’m not sure. I mean if that’s true, I have a lot of compassion for him and he has a huge responsibility for him, and if he’s really ill, may not feel up to the task, so I would have a lot of compassion for him, but I don’t think that means that we need to do anything differently. I just think that means that time will tell.”
It reminds me of my previous post in which I discussed President Kimball’s failing capacity.
There were a few warning signs in the early summer of 1981. When he was interviewed for a documentary on the Dallas Temple, the producer decided not to use the footage because “the film of the interview made him look very feeble and absentminded.”
…
Despite the improvement, rumors spread. One friend told Ed that he had been assured that Spencer was “a blob.”
…
His mental acuity was something like a radio signal, fading in and out. He managed small talk but had trouble calling up names, even of family members.
Michael Quinn also noted that during President Benson’s incapacity, an autopen was used giving his authorization for others to administer affairs of the church. My questions are these.
[poll id= 417]
[poll id= 418]
[poll id= 419]
[poll id= 420]
Wheat & Tares 
Voted for a retirement age of 70 but would prefer 80 for now because Uchtdorf is 73 and I would like to see him as prophet, and if it were 70 that would be 10 years of Bedinar.
I do think something has to be done about the succession. To have the oldest man standing is not a recipy for progress, but conservatism as it was practiced 40 years ago.
I voted no on the retirement age, I think in general that’s too young now, and probably it ought to be based on health/fitness rather than age specific.
I only voted no on step down because of the next in line…
Seniority succession for life insures the church will lag secular enlightenment rather than lead the world spiritually, that role has recently been assumed by Pope Francis who’s acts often resemble those of Jesus. (I’m not sure if he can wiggle his ears though)
We call our patriarchal hierarchy “leaders” and “leadership” but do we contemplate what that actually means? Where are they leading us?
Nowhere!
You may be progressing on your own but the saints as a group are just marching in place generation after generation sucking on a bottle of skim milk for sustenance. Yes we now have younger missionaries, how’s that working out? Are you aware of the high percentage of early returns being reported on the NOM blogs?
Leadership is NOT leading the church anywhere, the church is being led by grassroots agitation.
If we can reliably trace this rumor back to an a known person who examined the patient and who is qualified to make a diagnosis, then I’ll pay more attention. Dehlin claims to know fifty people in the COB who confirm the rumors. There’s fifty people who have first-hand information and are willing to spill their guts to John Dehlin? Sounds more like fifty people willing to pass on the gossip *they* heard. I’d be more impressed if he knew one or two people and could explain the source of their knowledge. Sometimes gossip turns out to be true, but gossip is still gossip.
Can anyone point to the Bible where an Apostle or Prophet retired because of age? I didn’t think so. Its an eternal calling, unless through disfellowship or excommunication. This call for retirement is ageism.
Most things LDS like to call eternal are only temporary eternal.
I do not worry about whether the Church is being led by someone who has dementia or not. There is a body equal to the First Presidency who can step in if necessary to run the Church.
I worry more about those who are now suffering from spiritual and doctrinal dementia.
Just to correct John’s statement, Pres. Monson is not over 90 yet. I readily know this because he is our first church president who is younger than my parents. Both my parents are still alive and completely coherent. But I do see that Pres. Monson has significantly diminished mental capacity in comparison to them. And yet, neither of my parents have ever seemed prophetic to me. I tend to agree with Kate’s comments as well as Geoff-Aus’s comments. We do have a safety net which is the quorum of the 12, but we also have younger apostles who are far more scary than the older ones.
Isn’t the real issue a generation gap problem that isn’t solved by retirement? With age comes wisdom, to a point, but not universally. People aren’t just wiser because they are older. And some of the social mores of older generations aren’t so much superior as they are simply different from today’s. I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. A retirement age of 80 is probably superior to no retirement age in that we might have to have some apostles enter at a younger age, and having voices from various generations would certainly break up group think more than not having those voices.
Jettboy, how do you interpret the scriptural statements that Elijah, Moses, and Enoch were taken up in a whirlwind at the age of 72? Was this God making them emeritus? Was it a euphemism for developing dementia? It’s an enigmatic phrase. Did God think 72 was a fitting retirement age?
I think he has dementia but heck so does a lot of folks at his age! I have seen him ramble on at the Calgary Temple dedication and it was awkward to witness. I hope though we are all doing well at that age
#8 – You’re probably not old enough to recall that many in the Church had the willies about Ezra Taft Benson someday becoming the Prophet due to his politics. Yet when it happened, It was obvious that he’d mellowed with age (he was 86) and his tenure entailed no controversy at all, save for his last few years when he wasn’t all there anymore.
We have to avoid the “personality cult”…that’s a thing for third world countries, and even the Soviets gave up on it after Stalin (with good reason, Brezhnev tried same but even Politburo members openly denounced him as out of touch and managed to avoid a free ticket to Siberia). This is WHY the Prophet doesn’t go it all alone. Presidents Eyring and Utchdorf are likely assuming more of an active role as President Monson slows down a tad, but what’s wrong with that? We forget WHO is actually in charge anyway, and He is quite capable of dealing with infirmities of his servants. I can imagine that President Monson, were he to have the time to chew the fat with any of one, would say, “When eighty-seven years old your are, look this good, you will not”.
I’m also diametricaly opposed to any mandatory age retirement policy. I’ve seen centenarians do the Ironman (not rapidly, but they do it!).
As for being “in touch” or “with the times”, methinks you’re not giving these old boys any credit. It’s true that some get hidebound. Only recently did we kids finally get my 80 y.o. father to use an ATM. He marvelled at all the “Bells and Whistles” on my new ride, but I had to remind him that it was actually a middling-option package and fairly much a modern car is more a four-wheeled mulitmedia computer that you drive and feed gasoline. While I can appreciate the simplicity of my first ride (’69 Dodge with a 340 4 bbl and a Hurst shifter), we’re living in the 2010’s, not the 1970’s. Methinks our Church leaders are likely well able to adjust.
I’d rather be led by a prophet with dementia supported by the other apostles than by a demented peanut gallery.
Hawk,
“With age comes wisdom, to a point, but not universally. ”
I would think that with age comes experience, not necessarily wisdom. Which would mean that 25 year Stake Presidents from Latin America and Africa might make better General Church leaders?
When looking at Church history, younger was not necessarily better either. I was reading Meg Stout’s article on M* and the younger Apostles were the ones trying to keep Polygamy alive after the Manifesto…. Not to mention what went on the in 1830s and 40’s…..
Interesting how the age cutoff people want isn’t for anything scientific, but so they can get the Apostle they like. “I wish Peter would just retire already, Paul would be a much better leader of the Church!”
Jesus and Joseph were both in their 30s when they died, of course both channeled God so experience was of secondary importance.
People should “retire” when they can’t or no longer wish to perform the job. Age discrimination is no better than any other.
I’ve known some that seemed demented from birth.
Hawkgrrl, I thought everyone knew Moses lived to be 120 (40 in pharoah’s court, 40 herding sheep, and 40 in the wilderness.) I’m unaware of any scripture noting the age of Elijah and Enoch, but I’m probably wrong.
In another 10 years, Holland or Uchdorf will be leading the Church, and the blogs will be run by members claiming the church is no longer conservative enough.
Douglas: I remember very well when Pres. Benson came in and the consternation people felt because of his John Birch society past. He had given a talk in PA at a regional conference that was very political, and when Kimball died, it was a huge worry.
I would never want to be led by a demented peanut gallery, so I’m unsure why anyone would make such an obvious comment. (Was it supposed to be funny?)
I remember in Pres. Kimball’s biography, he was really suffering from poor health and exclaimed “Why won’t God take me?” My question is “why didn’t he resign due to poor health?” It must have been so painful and frustrating. I don’t think God really wanted Presidents McKay, Joseph Fielding Smith, Kimball, Benson, Hunter, or any other leader to serve beyond their capacity. Why would God want that?
“. . . Elijah, Moses, and Enoch were taken up in a whirlwind at the age of 72?”
I’m not quite getting the joke. Something about the equivalence of legendary ages like 120 and 365 with mundane 72? Or the prophet who kept asking to die but was never allowed to?
I don’t know for sure about Pres. Monson, but I do have a close relative who does work closely with him, and they say that there are clearly days of better thinking than others. No medical diagnosis, but does show that he is not firing on all cylinders consistently.
I, for one, was incredibly impressed when the pope stepped down from his position. I just get a little uncomfortable when the man that is God’s mouthpiece stands up in conference and says I bless you all and gives a silly hand gesture.
I am trying to think of where is states in any canon that presidency is for life. Can someone quote me where this was stated and “sustained” by the membership of the church as IS stated in scripture?
In the blink of an eye we’ll be right up there with President Monson. It’s not a far leap from “too old to lead” to “too old to serve any useful purpose” to ” too old to be worth keeping alive.”
The older you get, the less you think old people are useles
So, does anyone else here suspect that Dehlin and Kelly just totally pulled this out of their arses because they’re both flailing around for reasons for their disciplinary hearings?
I don’t think God really wanted Presidents McKay, Joseph Fielding Smith, Kimball, Benson, Hunter, or any other leader to serve beyond their capacity. Why would God want that?
Perhaps the brethren are thinking along the same lines a Pope John Paul II.
– See more at: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/11/contrasting-benedict-and-john-paul-ii.html#sthash.rWdSzlgF.dpuf
Seth, I work for many television networks. A few years ago, President Monson was at a Jazz game, and I went over and shook his hand. I made the suggestion that we interview him. The director responded that he had done that another time, and the interview came off really weird, and he didn’t want to do it again. The director’s response reminded me of what was said about Pres. Kimball (that I quoted in the OP.) Additionally, one of my inlaws served with Pres Monson in Canada. They still have mission reunions, but Monson hasn’t been the same for several years now.
I have heard these rumors for a long time, and have been wanting to pose the question. Dehlin and Kelly, both interviewed by NPR, seemed to indicate that it is known in the media, but unspoken by many. So, no, I don’t think they’re pulling it out of there arses.
We know how well Presidents Kimball and Benson in particular were always protected regarding their mental state, even when it was poor. They were in worse condition than Monson. I’m not really surprised by the official silence about the dementia, but I personally would like to see him and Packer retire, rather than suffer from age-related illnesses in public.
It reminds me of the joke about a man that is flooded, and climbs on his roof. A boat comes by asking for help, but the man responds that he has faith that God will save him. Then a helicopter comes by, same response. The man gets to heaven and asks why God didn’t save him. God responds that he sent a boat and a helicopter.
Could it be that God is trying to tell these men that they should retire due to the frailties of age, but they are acting like the man on the roof?
I don’t know how many are following Donald Sterling and the LA Clippers. Sterling is 80, and just made some offensive comments about blacks and was banned for life from the NBA and forced to sell his team. He refused, but his wife made the sale go through because it was ruled he was suffering from dementia.
For all of you who think President Monson should not retire, do you feel that Donald Sterling should still own the LA Clippers basketball team?
I don’t really see a problem with it. The First Presidency isn’t just made up of President Monson. And the Quorum of the Twelve isn’t just made up of President Packer. And this isn’t a new thing – the LDS Church has been running fine for decades that way.
I don’t really mind the emeritus idea too much.
But I am highly suspicious of the word “dementia” – I’ve worked with a lot of old people in my life at one time or another. I witnessed my own great grandmother at age 103 in the rest home sobbing that her hair comb was a row of bullets they’d all laid out on the table to kill her. But what is dementia, and when do you have it?
Is just getting a bit absent minded and distracted really dementia? Or is it just a way for young people to express their contempt of old people because the old people didn’t agree with them?
Either way, I see Dehlin playing the age-card at this stage in the game as rather tacky. About a month ago he was even Facebooking under the hashtag #monsonhasdemintia until he realized people noticed it and pulled it. It’s a part of the little fantasy narrative he’s trying to concoct about “surely Monson is too nice a man to allow this to happen to me – so he must be mentally incompetent.”
The Other Clark and John Mansfield: As to the 72 years thing, this must be some weird folklore I’ve gotten somewhere. Speaking of needing to be put out to pasture . . . maybe the first sign of dementia is that I’ve got some notion that they were all 3 taken up in a whirlwind at the same age of 72. There was something that used to be said about 72 being “the age of a man.”
Hmm, would you mind if your airline pilots were in their 80s with dementia?
Maybe from the twelve disciples in the BoM, hawkgrrrl? I believe it says that except for the the three Nephites who wouldn’t taste death, the other nine would live to the age of a man and die at 72. (I’m too lazy to look up the exact scriptural reference, but I think the gist of this is accurate.)
On a different topic, I don’t know that apostles should be forced to retire because mental and physical health can vary greatly from person to person. But I do think it should be an option for them – if they start feeling it’s too great a strain or they become mentally incapacitated, I think they should be allowed to retire, especially if that’s what’s best for their health.
The Church tends to operate largely on momentum and inertia (tradition) with occasional changes made due to external or internal (and grassroots) pressures. It wasn’t until April 1899 that the top 15 decided that seniority among apostles was to be determined by the date they were sustained as a member of the quorum of the 12–because the first 4 prophets had each ordained all their sons to the office of Apostle. There were more than 12 living until the last of these legacy Apostles died. At that point in 1899, the youthful ordination of one of Brigham’s sons made him the senior Apostle–and “next in line” to be prophet. But, he was far from capable and tainted by some bad behavior, and had never been a member of the “quorum of the twelve.” So, the problem was solved by formalizing this new rule to replace the past unwritten (inertia-driven) procedure
The current 15 could do something similar without the heavens crashing down. Sure, the church leadership process has “seemed” to operate well when the prophet is not mentally sharp. But, we hear, and for example can read notable and credible examples (“David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism”) of power plays and behind the scenes influence/power being wielded inappropriately largely due to the prophet being incapacitated by his physical and/or mental health.
I just looked at the 12 Apostles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_Quorum_of_the_Twelve_Apostles_(LDS_Church)#Current_Quorum_of_the_Twelve_Apostles
If they all had to retire at age 70, we would be out Packer, Perry, Nelson, Oaks, Ballard, Scott, Hales, Holland, Cook.
Christofferson would have a year left, leaving only Bednar and Anderson.
As for the First Presidency, Uchtdorf would have 2 years left, but Eyring and Monson would be gone.
If they’re going to do this, it would definitely have to be phased in.
In addition to Donald Sterling (mentioned above), Tennessee’s women’s bball coach Pat Summitt retired because of dementia.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dementia
I believe that being a member of the church with a prophet who is slowed by the advances of age is a test that the Lord intends for us to learn from. We learn patience, as we need to learn when the answers to our own physical and spiritual tests occur. We learn that answers may come in the Lord’s time and not by our timetables. I do not see anything so urgent in Kate’s needs that cannot afford to wait for an answer while the Lord is arranging His changing of the guard. And yes, I know she does not want to wait, unanswered, indefinitely.
We still have service to perform, missionary and temple work to do, and prayer and scripture study to maintain. Yet, I understand that waiting for President Monson to pass with the knowledge that he will then be replaced by President Packer is a monumental test for many.
TBM faith promoting bias can turn any bug into a feature!
MOQT: Yes, that’s it! Whew!
I like to think of senior church leaders as great uncles and grandfathers who do the best they can — we don’t retire grandfathers — rather, we patiently support them, and listen to their advice, and laugh and laugh at their jokes, because we love them and because we know they love us. And, we don’t inherit until they die. I’m speaking in generalities, of course, but I think we tend to err when we think of the church as a modern corporation and its leaders as hired executives, who are only useful so long as they produce.
This works at the local level, too. For example, I don’t see my bishop and stake president as my divisional managers and my supervisors or managers — I see them as uncles and fathers called to give advice and counsel as I and my wife make the decisions we have to as we raise our family.
Anyway, D&C 90:6 tells me that each of the three members of the First Presidency are equal in holding the keys, so really a decision from a counselor is equal to a decision from the president. So if President Monson isn’t actively involved for a while, that’s okay — his counselors can run the show with full scriptural authority.
The following might be helpful–
The Counselors Carry On the Work of the First Presidency If the President Is Ill
President Gordon B. Hinckley (1910–2008) explained how the work of the First Presidency continues even when the President of the Church is ill or unable to perform his duties: “When the President is ill or not able to function fully in all of the duties of his office, his two Counselors together comprise a Quorum of the First Presidency. They carry on with the day-to-day work of the Presidency. In exceptional circumstances, when only one may be able to function, he may act in the authority of the office of the Presidency as set forth in the Doctrine and Covenants, section 102, verses 10–11” (in Conference Report, Apr. 1994, 74; or Ensign, May 1994, 54; emphasis added).
https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-of-the-living-prophets-student-manual/chapter-4-the-quorum-of-the-first-presidency?lang=eng
ji,
Was ETB wrong about the prophet being the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything?
Ezra Taft Benson said that in a devotional address at BYU in 1980. I claim the privilege of the right and responsibility to take, with a grain of salt, anything that strikes me as odd or untrue when it is said by anyone at a devotional.
Those devotional speeches by apostles over the past 50 years are definitely a mixed bag. Some excellent and some not.
JI, the First Presidency may carry on, but they won’t produce revelation, as that is not their calling. I think the reason we have had so few revelations is because these old men don’t have their mental faculties. Carrying on is not the same as leading. I think it’s a shame that so many church members aren’t interested in hearing what God has to say anymore. They think “all is well in Zion.” I’d rather hear what God has to say, and I don’t think it is simply to carry on. The gerontocracy is not producing God’s word, but merely recycling what has already been said, and then passing that off as God’s word. It’s a shame.
There is an interesting post at Rational Faiths Continuing revelation prevents Change in Mormonism.
If we are supposed to sustain these guys are prophets, seers, and revelators, then they need to prophecy, see, and revelate. Where is it? Where are new scriptures? I’ve got nothing in 3 decades, and 1 non-scripture declaration in over 100 years. Prophecy. See. Revelate. Or retire if you have dementia or physical maladies.
Having a prophet with diminished physical/mental capacity doesn’t bother me. People get old, it’s just what happens. What bothers me is what appears to be extended efforts by the Church to cover it up and perpetuate the image that nothing is amiss, a la “Weekend at Bernie’s”. I am much more willing to accept a church leader who openly acknowledges his weaknesses (e.g. Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict) rather than one who is constantly propped up and turned into a puppet of his younger colleagues. They protect that façade so fiercely sometimes that they are willing to throw the prophet’s own family members under the bus when they pull back the curtain just a little bit (e.g. Steve Benson). This whole notion of “keeping up appearances” is very Mormon, but I don’t think it is as bad as it was in the past, since nowadays less-able apostles are allowed to speak from a seated position.
As a child during the presidency of ETB, I remember being constantly told to “follow the prophet” and revere that sacred office, only to be confused by his constant absence. In my young mind, I had imagined that the “prophet” was some sort of mysterious Howard Hughes-like recluse who was too busy privately communing with God to appear in General Conference anymore. Years later, when I found out the truth, I felt deceived. How are we supposed to trust the prophet as God’s mouthpiece if he can’t trust us to be understanding of his human frailties?
MH,
Shortly after President Hinckley became president of the church, he came to a meeting in Atlanta, I think, where I heard him say that he wished members would refer to him more as the president of the church, rather than prophet, because president of the church is his sustained office and is the source of essentially all of his authority, including his authority as prophet. But it didn’t stick, as members and his own counselors insisted on referring to him as prophet and he didn’t insist. But there is wisdom in his teaching.
I think D&C 112:20 is still true (cf. D&C 84:36-38).
If the spirit of prophecy is to bear testimony of the Savior (Rev. 19:10), maybe they are doing very well as prophets?
I think God still speaks, but with the priesthood so diffused, He doesn’t have to speak all the time to one man. Maybe D&C 1:20 is at work?
Jack (no. 43),
You raise a very good point…
Jack has memories of Pres. Benson’s poor health when he was a child. I was in my twenties when Gordon B. Hinckley was carrying the whole load of the first presidency as Spencer W. Kimball and then Marion G. Romney’s health failed so that he was the sole spokesperson for the presidency. And then again, Hinckley and Monson carried things on, speaking as the presidency when Ezra Taft Benson’s health began to slide. So yes, I can see why those songs about “following the prophet” could be confusing to a child, but the idea that all the apostles were sustained as “prophets, seers and revelators” was commonly accepted by the people I knew at church in the 1980s and 1990s and that therefore revelation could come through any one of them or through the functioning members of a presidency, or from them as a group. There wasn’t a sense that anyone was hiding anything. There was, however, a general understanding that other general authorities greatly respected the president of the church and wished to allow him some dignity in his old age and wished to include him in their circle, however limited that inclusion might be.
Though I certainly hope I will be released from callings where my senility might cause damage I do hope my fellow church colleagues will treat me with the same sort of kind-hearted deference when I am in my dotage.
Most of the older members of my HP group, have not held a calling more significant/responsible than assistant clark for many years. We accept that we are no longer likely to be called as Bishops, or even high councilors. Why?
Is there a different standard for average members, than Apostles? Don’t we follow their example?
My Stake President is in his 30s. How many of you have Bishops and Stake Presidents, Mission Presidents, or any other level of leadership in the church in your part of the world that has people serving into their 80s and beyond? Not where I’ve been.
It is tradition that the next Prophet has to be the senior Apostle, I believe it is time that the next Prophet be the best person for the job? Also that a retirement age be instituted for Apostle as it is for the rest of us.
80 would be a start but 70 would be better.
If a corpotation put in a chairman who was 89 and suffering from demintia, what do you think would happen to the share price?
We have missionaries out there saying we have a Prophet on earth today, and he’s 89, and senile. Not a good message, not a good reality.
I believe it is time that the next Prophet be the best person for the job?. This is a very good point. The Catholics have a better system in this regard, the church rocked by scandal needed a new face and as politically inspired as it was they selected a more Christlike pope than has been seen in a very long time. This is much more responsive than our die off model.
We all agree, I think, that sexism, racism, discrimination based on disability and other forms of prejudice are inconsistent with the gospel Jesus preaches. I believe that it is important, when we discuss the age of our fellow servants, that we be motivated by compassion for them and not by ageism or fear of the effects of disability.
In my culture the elderly are generally shunted aside to make room for the younger, quicker workers. Productivity and current information and trends is front and center to many.
Though that may be good for businesses and social organizations seeking to be competitive and fast, I’m convinced that it is not good for the soul in God’s work.
My experience with the elderly in a variety of non-profit and religious organizations is that the age of a coworker and the effects of his or her age in any humanitarian work completely staffed by volunteers can be lovingly compensated for by alert and compassionate coworkers. And that can be successfully done in any organization in which the core principles of their work are inclusion, compassion and brotherhood that extends not only to those they serve, but also to those they serve with.
I would be fine with it if an aging apostle felt called to step down, but I think we need to examine our motivations pretty carefully as we call for it ourselves.
The actual period of any incapacitation is quite short in the overall scheme of things. It only lasts a few years at best. Meanwhile, the Church still runs. The fact is that illnesses take these men off the public stage when appropriate and they are not allowed to ramble incoherently in front of the whole church.
One wishes sometimes Testimony meeting could work so well.
Also, some have cited the Pope stepping down as some sort of litmus test for openness. However, one must remember that Pope Benedict had other, more “political” issues at play (like Priest sexual abuse and financial irregularities) and not just “old age.”
Jeff, I disagree. Of the last 7 prophets, 5 have had significant periods of incapacity. Hinckley and Lee (who served just 2 years) are the exceptions. The rule is incapacity, and we’ve had pretty much 40 years of it (with the exception of Hinckley.) This is a big problem, not a short incapacitation.
And I’m surprised you haven’t attended a bunch or rambling testimony meetings.
Fellow bloggers, why do so many of ye have such disdain for the experience of the “Senior Citizens” when by defintion you’re attempting to join their ranks someday?
Before anyone jumps on Tommy Monson’s abilities in light of his advanced age, I would remind folks that he has 50+ years experience as an Apostle. He was called at THIRTY-SIX..a vertiable “whippersnapper”, and that AFTER he’d served as a young bishop of a large SLC ward that had a lot of widows. All of you self-professed ‘management’ and ‘human resources’ experts would dispense with all that experience simply b/c the old boy at times appears a bit befuddled? That’s WHY he has counselors and another governing body (Quorum of the Twelve), as well as a large professional staff. For all practical purposes, the Church runs itself, as any well-mahnaged organization ought to. Folks, the Lord knows what He’s doing, and if He wants an “old coot” presiding, He’ll get one. Better “Tommy Boy” than me, that’s for sure!
“And I’m surprised you haven’t attended a bunch or rambling testimony meetings.’
I have, believe me. I didn’t mean to imply otherwise. In fact, we had a very long “thankimony” and “moveimony” the past week.
One of the major problems with life tenure and seniority power is various minority groups must suffer for the egos and face saving resulting from false words spoken earlier while waiting for these incompetents to die off. How long did blacks suffer under the ban justified by now repudiated absurdities? How long will gays continue to suffer for Packer’s ignorance? How long will Oaks insist SSA is wrong in order to defend his failed Values Institute goals that resulted in coerced (failed) methods of aversion therapy now repudiated by respected psych organizations? How many suicides? How many damaged gay lives? How many families destroyed for the egos of a few men who pretend their certitude comes directly from God. Shhh! Don’t criticize the brethren even if it’s true. Right bro. Oaks?
Those that bemoan the perceived backwardness, bigotry, and hideboundness of our long-lived leadership, especially those, like Howard, that work themselves over “damaged gay lives” (oh, bruutherrr…) ought to dust off a copy of Logan’s Run (1976) and see a treatise on a culture devoted to youthfulness and self-indulgence. As for myself, I’d rather get old like Peter Ustinov was portrayed in that film, even if I’m sharing the ruins of the US Capitol with five hundred cats.
Douglas the Caveman,
You are unbelievably offensive. It’s no problem that senile old men cause gays to commit suicide. Seriously? You are a true, proud bigot.
“The advantage of the Gerentocracy is that they’ll seen it all, done it all, and hopefully age has rendered some wisdom. The hell of it is to garner that wisdom before they forget it all.”
I know you wrote this on another post, but frankly, that’s my problem. Monson and Kimball and Benson are forgetting it all, they’re not leading.
It’s not age that’s the problem, it’s dementia. Unfortunately it usually coincides with age. If men could serve like Pres Hinckley into their 90s without much diminished capacity, then I’m all for it. But too many of these leaders are acting like Donald Sterling, and it ain’t pretty. I just wish they acted with grace like Pope Benedict (and even RLDS President Wallace Smith, who retired.) The leadership looks too much like the LA Clippers. It’s sad. (But something tells me Douglas is a Clippers fan and actually thinks Sterling should stay in place. What an embarrassment.)
MH,
” It’s no problem that senile old men cause gays to commit suicide.”
To actually CAUSE someone to do something like that would be murder, wouldn’t it?
Don’t people ultimately have their own free agency?
“But something tells me Douglas is a Clippers fan” NOW you’re getting nasty. No true denizen of NORTHERN California would be a fan of any sports franchise south of the Tehachapi range. We have enough issues with the Kings and the Warriors (it’s a funny coincidence that the abbreviation for that team whose home court is at Oracle Arena in OAKLAND is “GSW”, which is also the term for GunShot Wound) as it is. I’m merely amused. Now, suh, if you’d said I was a Dodgers fan, them’s fightin’ words…
I DO appreciate the label “Caveman” if I’m in company with this Giant who was a decent pitcher but also swung a potent bat. I saw him win a game with a walk-off pinch hit home run. Not only the “Babe” could hit AND pitch. BTW, it was Ruth that held the scoreless innings record for nearly FIFTY years before Drysdale, another slugging pitcher, surpassed in in 1968.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/robindo01.shtml
I don’t appreciate the label “bigot” simply b/c I don’t run the “Gays and the LDS Church” up the pink flag pole and salute it. Believing what prophets of yore and today have said and continue to say is NOT bigotry, it’s being truthful. Still, I’ll wear it proudly, like being “Dad” or “Grandpa”, it’s not about the popularity.
I should hope to be a clueless billionaire when I’m 80 and consorting with a hot Asian young lady. However, to liken Donald Sterling to Presidents Benson or Kimball is ludicrous. And these “senile” old men “cause” gays to commit suicide? How, pray tell, can these “senile old men”, by virtue of exercising their free agency and their First Amendment rights, cause any person to do ANYTHING? IDK whose mental faculties ought to be evaluted, sir, either these aggrieved gay men who are suicidal due to mere words of men that they don’t take seriously (anymore), or yourself for seeing some cause-and-effect. And I suppose, sir, that if these “senile old men” stepped down from their callings), to while away the rest of their days in the rocking chair on the porch, that some younger men, whom you likely hope have more “progressive” or “tolerant” attitudes towards gays as you deem fit, would receive different revelation from the same Lord. Heretic, I can’t presume to judge your testimony (and indeed, at times you’ve borne very uplifting tones in this forum, I have to be fair and mention that), but I’d wonder if you understand the nature of direct, ongoing revelation in the affairs of the Lord’s Church. The foibles of our leaders can be amusing at times but they merely show that the Lord is not hindered by OUR weaknesses.
Jeff, I do believe the Lord will hold the Brethren to some accountability.
I was listening to an interview with John Dean of the Nixon Administration. He came to the conclusion that Nixon did not know beforehand about the Watergate break-in, but did in fact cover it up, and also created an environment in which his underlings thought Nixon wanted the bungled burglary to take place. According to Dean, Nixon used words like “we need a plant in there.” Well, a plant could be interpreted as a person, or an electronic device. Halderman and Libby took Nixon’s words too far. Was Nixon directly responsible for the break-in? No, but he was indirectly responsible.
I think the same could be said for the brethren. By the harsh rhetoric against gays or women or blacks, they are indirectly responsible for a lot of emotional turmoil. Yes there is free-agency, but just as Nixon said things that were over-interpreted by his underlings, the Brethren are often over-interpreted by well-meaning family members, creating a hostile environment in which minorities are mistreated, and yes some do things like suicide or whatever. Where does free-agency end and personal responsibility begin? It’s a tough question to answer, but I do think some of the harsh rhetoric has been misused by well-meaning family members, leaving some to feel there is no way out of the pain but death.
Ignoring injustices (>100 years in the case of blacks, approaching 200 years for women) and blaming the injustices upon God is taking the name of God in vain and immoral, IMO. I don’t want to blame God for man’s bad behavior, and attempts to do that are just simply misguided and a misuse of scripture.
It’s easy to see the Catholics guilty of the crusades, but it’s a lot harder to admit that Mormons have similar blind spots with regards to race, sex, and priesthood.
Closeted people are in that closet for a reason, the shame society puts on them! Then add shame from the pulpit and you’ve created a deadly combination. God says you are an evil mistake. It isn’t funny, it is a potent toxin that attacks the self and it has been spued from the mouthes of “God’s anointed”. It is deadly ecclesiastical abuse that destroys lives and families. Can you really imagine Jesus doing it?
32 fbisti on Augus,
how did BY ordination of his young son make his son the senior apostle? i don’t get that part. And where did you read all this? I’d be interested in reading more about this too
Looking at that wikipedia list of apostles I’d say we should bump Monson off and bring in Perry, who’s 90, because the younger Packer is more wasted than Monson is..but if Perry is now sick too we could bring in Nelson, who is 89 and as a doctor could operate on himself to stay alive while serving as president…or better still knock off all those old dudes over 84 (Monson, Packer, Perry, Nelson) and bring in the young lad Oaks, who as an 81 year old could serve well and judge all very well (he was a judge remember) for about 4 years cause once he reaches Monson’s current age we’d have to bump him off into retirement too, and then bring in the boy Holland who’s now 73 and….heck this aint working me thinks.. 🙂
Geoff -Aus
Monson turns 87 this year. He was born in 1927 and is younger than Packer, Perry, Nelson, and Ballard.
I think his counselors, the 81 year old Eyring and the 73 year old Uchtdorf more than make up for any shortcomings Monson has due to his age. Plus both are really outsiders from the Utah mold, Eyring is practically a New Jerseyite and the other’s German so unless Utchdorf is now too proud because germany’s world champions, I’d say that they are more than capable of bringing a change to the church as Monson ages, So as Monson ages the better it will be and the better then chances of change from the conservative mindset an Oaks or Holland would have, not to mention the kid Bednar! they are more conservative than the first presidency by far – not that its a problem to be conservative off course!
MH,
“but I do think some of the harsh rhetoric has been misused by well-meaning family members, ”
Actually, I do agree with most of what you said. I find it a bit sad that Church Leaders accepted and promoted some of the societal norms with regards to race and gender attraction instead of leading out with Christ-like love, first and foremost.
And even sadder is the fact that Church members amplified that thinking into actual hate, scorn and rejection. But then again, I come from a faith tradition that rejected their children for marrying into the wrong part of the faith, let alone outside of it. Even holding funerals for their “departed” kin.
I also think that youth suicide is at an epidemic level. All of my kids have had friends and acquaintances who have killed themselves or participated in very risky behavior that led to death. Even church members. None of those kids did so, as far as I know, for gender issues. So I think that the gay youth suicide rate is wrapped up in a larger issue of youth suicides in general. All if it is bad, tragic and preventable.
We all bear some level of responsibility for that. How we account for it later in the eternities is not really up to us to judge. But no one can be held responsible for another person’s actual choice.
Geoff_A,
I don’t think Elder Holland is that conservative, but practically a progressive compared to some much younger than him. Starts with a “B.”
Mormon Heretic, you seem to be remembering the infirmities of the church presidents in a disproportional way. A relative of mine cared for an ailing husband for several years, and after he died and her heavy burden was lifted it took many months to remember when he had been well and her life with him had been happy. Before illness incapacitated them, Kimball and Benson both had periods of vigorous and effective leadership. The mid and late 70s were a high point for the church with members following cues given by Kimball to engage with their religion and expand it through the world. Benson gave several conference talks in his early years as president that also set a tone that the members followed; e.g. the Book of Mormon and To the Mothers in Zion. Howard Hunter was dying the whole short time he was president, but he didn’t seem mentally diminished, and his call to engage with the temple encouraged one woman I knew at the time to receive the endowment. I also noticed that in the year or two before they became president, the mantle of presidency began falling on Benson and Hunter as they preached. Hunter’s calls to Christian discipleship were piercing. During these high points of service I mention, all three were already old and weak.
I didn’t experience Joseph Fielding Smith presidency, but let’s suppose he was incapacitated the whole two and a half years. Add to that the last half of Kimball’s twelve years from 1980 through 1985, Benson’s last five and a half years from 1989 through the middle of 1994, and Monson’s time since the beginning of 2008. That would make up twenty-one years of incapacitation since 1970. Remember the other twenty-four years as well.
The church should have taken the opportunity to introduce emeritus status prior to the resignation of Pope Benedict. Now, of course, we can’t go following in the footsteps of the Catholic church. It might imply that they are in some way more inspired…
John, according to your numbers, we have a half-time prophet.
According to Mike Quinn, there was serious consideration to bypass Joseph Fielding Smith because of age, and he agreed to let Lee run things in order to serve as prophet. When Lee died, everyone knew Kimball was in poor health. Miraculously, he recovered quite a bit, but he was never very healthy. (Remember his raspy voice from throat cancer?) Benson was in poor health too, but did have a bit of recovery at the beginning of his presidency. I’d put the numbers higher than you did, but even still, you’re looking at about 50% of the time without real leadership. But I guess that’s no big deal because we only need a half-time prophet because he doesn’t prophesy anyway. (My how we’ve lowered the bar–I guess we should just become protestants if our prophet is so ineffective at revelation. What’s the difference?)
Jeff, I’m glad to see we have an agreement (for a recent change.)
MH, do you have any good memories of Kimball, Benson, or Hunter fulfilling their calling as prophet, seer, and revelator presiding the church of Jesus Christ?
I do have memories of Kimball fulfilling the roles of prophet and revelator (not so much seer)–we got OD2.
I have no recollection of Benson and Hunter revealing, seeing, or prophesying anything. But they did give some good talks. If giving good talks is all we need from a prophet, I know some people in my stake that could fulfill the role of prophet and they are in good health. Maybe the Lord could speak to them to get a revelation for the church.
“Jeff, I’m glad to see we have an agreement (for a recent change.)”
It’s either the broken clock syndrome or the burrito….. 🙂
“….prior to the resignation of Pope Benedict.”
I am not sure why people would seize on this event as some magnanimous event. In addition to health issues, he had the Priest sexual abuse milestone around his neck as well as financial mismanagement in the Vatican under his watch as Pope and also prior to his appointment. There are much more politics in the Catholic Church as that level than in our Church.
Before you go wild, I am not saying that politics in the Church doesn’t exist, Only that the President of the Church is not decided by a council and smoke.
We should go out for burritos more often!
As for scandals, Pope Francis still has to deal with them, and Pope John Paul 2 had the same scandals about sex abuse for clergy. I’m not seeing Pope Benedict different than either of them in regards to sex abuse scandals, so I’m not viewing that as his reason to step down. This wikipedia article tells us that Benedict has had multiple strokes which could lead to both physical and mental impairments. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVI#Health
Certainly Pres Kimball had multiple brain surgeries due to brain bleeds. It’s unclear to me why he felt he couldn’t retire, but I guess the first time a prophet (or pope) resigns is bound to cause a lot of news.
JP II was so popular that he could transcend the issues. Frances, the same way. Many, many didn’t care for Benedict to begin with because he was a German. I know my MIL did not care for him at all.
But I do know the point about the impairment issue at some point needs to be looked into in the Church. the days of the FDR game are really over.
@73-I recall Pres. Benson’s talk about pride and him saying he knows that this is what the Lord wants revealed now
Whizzbang, you remember no such thing. Benson wasn’t there. Hinckley read the talk because Benson was too ill to give it himself. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcle5-m81-0
I don’t think Monson should retire, if he does have dementia, then it should be openly talked about, and those moments of clarity should be embraced.
@79-I didn’t say Pres. Benson delivered the talk, I said it was his talk, I don’t care who read it:)
“I recall Pres. Benson’s talk about pride and him saying he knows that this is what the Lord wants revealed now”
Now I’ll have to check and see if Hinckley said that. I still think your memory is faulty. Pres Benson may have written it, but he never SAID it, and I don’t think he wrote it either.
I see that a lot of people seem to think the post and comments are about age discrimination. I disagree. The idea tha GAs should retire at a certain age was brought up but that’s a far cry from attacking someone for their age.
It only makes sense to allow them to opt out if they are senile or in poor health. Surely, God is just as capable of speaking to and through someone with all tbeir marbles, even better than through or with someone on the road to not remembering family, themselves, how to eat, how to speak, and so forth.
We truly hold onto our traditions with a death grip it seems. Heaven help us if God should attempt to reach us outside of our paradigms or to teach us anything outside of our traditions and convictions that we know all about how He works, what He would say, and who He would speak through.
Toni (84) – “Heaven help us if God should attempt to reach us outside of our paradigms or to teach us anything outside of our traditions and convictions that we know all about how He works, what He would say, and who He would speak through.”
This kind of contradicts your previous paragraph. Heaven help us if God should attempt to reach us through someone we’ve written off as too infirm. Could a God who made the blind see, the lame walk, and the dead live again not give someone clarity long enough to do what is needed by Him?
Frank, there are a lot of blind, lame, and dead people God has not healed (in fact more than he has healed.) The probability is low in giving someone with dementia clarity. Sure it is possible, but it is not probable.
I think Apostles, including 1st Presidency members, should retire by age 85, so they can rest and spend the rest of their days with family and friends.
Apostle is an Office in the Priesthood, they will be Apostles forever. I’m a Bishop, I’ll work as Bishop for some 5 years, but I’m a Bishop forever in the Priesthood.
Same goes for Patriarchs. The office of Patriarch is held for life. If the Patriarch is no longer able to function in his duties, an additional Stake Patriarch may be called. A sick Patriarch remains the Stake Patriarch, there’s no release from the calling, but receives “nonfunctioning status”.
18 Beechfield Avenue,
Skelmanthorpe
there are dangerous waters you are treading. The Lord calls and releases the President and all other general authorities. Apostles are called for life. Any interference with this is “Counselling The Lord.” He is in charge. Have faith and leave it in his hands. Instead of pontificating and suggesting things it is no one’s place to do, pray for the prophet that he is strengthened until the Lord releases him in His own time. The first presidency and the Twelve have all the authority to deal with anything.