The changes last weekend at general conference were the biggest in my lifetime. I want to provide a short historical perspective from the Late Ming Dynasty (1368- 1644) that shows the symbolic significance of having big changes early in Nelson’s time as prophet.
The general perception among scholars and the public is that the late Ming dynasty was one of decline. Viewed through the lens of the dynastic cycle, it had entered the death throes and was circling the drain. But the campaigns of the Wanli emperor (1572-1620) decisively show that was not the case. During a period of ten years in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, the Ming campaigned and won in every corner of the empire. Some allied northwestern tribes of Mongols rebelled and were swiftly crushed. Li Rusong was then directed to Korea. There the Ming dynasty successfully defended its vassal against a much larger and experience Japanese force that was closer to its supply lines. Finally, the Ming defeated rebelling tribesman in the remote southwest. The Ming dynasty overcame vast logistical challenges and severe threats at almost every corner of the empire, including the extensive and successful counterinsurgency against the Wokou, or dwarf pirates, along the southeastern coast.
The martial success in every corner of the empire shows how the Ming retained what modern analysts would call strong fundamentals. They had a large population, a good tax base, increasing wealth, and a military that was large and fairly well-equipped. The problems in this era tended to derive from the inertia of a bureaucracy. The chief ministers fought among themselves and with the eunuchs who advised the emperor. A vigorous military leader and strong emperor could cut through the red tape to promote good policies and make good military decisions. Most emperors looked at the infighting among their ministers and voluminous reports generated by the government apparatus and simply stopped caring. After all, they were emperors and could live a life of luxury in any number of opulent palaces as they pursued their favorite hobbies. The various regional governors and local officials managed their territory reasonably well, but what we would call national, foreign, and domestic policy generally became listless.
In short, much like the collapse of the Song dynasty described in chapter 7 of my book, a lack of leadership and proper military policy led to weakness in the late Ming dynasty. A strong leader could direct the proper military and economic resources to a certain region, conduct diplomacy, and properly harness the strong military families like the Li.
The bureaucracy of China and the church can be helpful at times. During times of absent or ineffectual leadership the inertia of a bureaucracy can maintain the essential functions of the organization. But innovation and change need an active leader that can overcome that inertia. I’ll leave it to others, such as the excellent discussion from Kevin Barney, to assess the specific implications of Nelson’s changes. The church faces many challenges, including declining activity and conversions. The latter is especially worrisome considering the spike in missionaries. I can speak from personal experience that many singles and mid singles don’t have a place in a church obsessed with marriage. Millennials are the least religious generation and have specific issues with the church’s (lack of) focus on Christ and treatment of the LGBTQ community. Simplifying the quorum structure, ending home and visiting teaching, and diversifying the leadership to reflect the church’s global presence are very good signs on their own, but also signify that more bold changes are coming to address those serious issues and vigorously move them through the often static bureaucracy.
Wheat & Tares 
This is a really interesting lens for analysis. As someone who is not studied in Chinese history, I was sort of expecting based on the title that the Wanli Emperor might have been the initiator of a dynasty — that is to say, that every prophet represents a new dynasty in church leadership. So to be recalibrated to think of prophets as being leaders within a dynastic institution is really helpful, and I think it’s especially interesting in comparing to the church.
Believe me, no sister in this ward is going to be letting VT end. They are already making plans to outminister the VT program with an increase in wiping every nose and attending every medical appointment with every sister. I’m exhausted at the prospect myself.
Brothers may be another thing, my dear husband has plans for watching more TV after a 12 hour day…and occasionally playing his guitar. He’s probably earned it.
This essay motivated me to buy a copy of your book I was reading in pdf as a review copy as a kindle volume.
Handle,
If they do it right, the official information on the church website says the ministering sisters themselves are supposed to decide the amount and manner of ministering. But like so many things, they may not do it right.
I already knew that I am near ignorant of Chinese history (at least I am aware of my ignorance). It is interesting comparison that you make. Working in a large corporation, I agree with your comments about the inertia of bureaucracy.
Take this with a grain of salt. It has little to do with the Ming dynasty.
In the 1950’s my mother worked as a secretary in the church office with President McKay and the other leaders on a daily bias, sometimes taking shorthand at high level meetings when things like correlation were debated. Of course all the secretaries talked to each other vigorously nonstop. My father who wasn’t there, got his ideas second handed and in later life was more inclined to “spill the beans” with maybe a little cayenne pepper added in for flavor.
Anyway, his pet theory was that the women already exercised the priesthood. The wives of the correlation champions, such as Jesse Evans Smith had virtual nooses around the necks of their husbands and led them around like tame ponies. He was right- that just giving a woman leadership is not the end of the discussion, but which women doing what needs to be considered. Same as with men leaders.
This line of thinking might cause me to consider how much influence Sister Wendy Watson Nelson had in the recent “adjustments.'” Although President Nelson appears vigorous, he is about 40 years older than her and she is likely even more vigorous. Likewise, President Oaks has a younger vigorous wife. With the transparency inherent in Mormonism we will likely never know how much influence or “priesthood” these women actually exercised. But what do you think?
Having now watched all the conference, there were less mentions of traditional families, wicked worlds and gay marriage, or obedience, instead we seem to have moved to Christlike love and ministering. I support this move, as this is my understanding of the Gospel.
The problem I see is that Christlike love, along with “all are alike unto God” , does not allow for discrimination against women or gays.
So unless those issues are addressed they begin to look hypocritical.
I can not understand why someone can’t be honest about the sex scandals, rather than trying to ignore them. Honesty, credibility.
I found the article intriguing, though the title “Hustle M. Nelson and the Wanli Emperor” conjured up images the author apparently didn’t intend.
Is “Hustle” a new moniker for Nelson or a typo? Also, posting a picture of the prophet and his wife, I assumed Wendy was the Wanli Emperor, as the title stated “Hustle Nelson and the Wanli Emperor”. Of course she’s not literally a Chinese emperor, so I figured she bore a similarity to this particular one, which would be explored in the article. Calling Wendy Emperor Wanli was a simile, in other words.
I thought Wendy Watson and Wanli was a clang association hinting that she is the new emperor of Mormonia.
handlewithcare, oh dear, you have my sympathy. Whenever I’ve served on a presidency I’ve had to point out magnifying ones calling doesn’t mean do more. There was a conference talk I had in mind, but I can’t find it, however this one shares a similar sentiment:
““And how does one magnify a calling? Simply by performing the service that pertains to it” (“Priesthood Power,” Liahona, Jan. 2000, 60; Ensign, Nov. 1999, 51). Sisters, we can do that! I hear women say that their callings are wearing them out or that they don’t have time to serve. But magnifying our callings does not mean staying up all night preparing handouts and elaborate table decorations. It does not mean that each time we do our visiting teaching we have to take something to our sisters. Sometimes we are our own worst enemies. Let’s simplify. The message of a good lesson comes through spiritual preparation. Let’s put our focus on the principles of the gospel and on the material in our study guides. Let’s prepare to create an interesting exchange of ideas through discussion, not through extra, invented work that makes us so weary we come to resent the time we spend in fulfilling our callings.”
(https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2004/10/out-of-small-things?lang=eng)