Posted by:
Tevai
(
)
Date: July 14, 2014 05:22PM
You are welcome!!! :)
There is another way to look at this:
From a certain level (my guess would be stake level, but I could be wrong--so if I am, please correct me), either most every, or every, man chosen for a stake-or-above leadership position was judged by SOMEONE ELSE, higher up than them, to be potentially corruptible. Those doing the "choosing" may not have consciously realized that what they were doing was selecting for potential corruptibility, but they DID know what they had been taught was the "proper" criteria to base their judgments on. (Some may not have realized the significance of the criteria they were, as directed, using.)
And this has nothing to do with whether an individual so CHOSEN was ACTUALLY corruptible, because I am sure that there have always been a percentage of men "chosen" who were not, in fact, corruptible. (Some were undoubtedly just very dedicated true believers who were honestly clueless as to what was REALLY going on.)
But the next few promotional steps upward would tell the tale: those who were corruptible were free to progress upwards...those who were not either stalled or, in effect, dropped out of the leadership race.
By some certain point, EVERY SINGLE MALE CHOSEN HAD BEEN VETTED, ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS, BY MULTIPLE PEOPLE HIGHER THAN THAT PERSON, FOR HIS POTENTIAL CORRUPTIBILITY.
By that point (whatever it is; if someone can specifically identify it, I would be most grateful), EVERY MALE HAD PROVEN--IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER--THAT HIS LOYALTY TO TSCC EXCEEDED HIS LOYALTY TO ANY OTHER INTEREST (personal character, spouse, family, etc.), and that--if push came to shove--there would be NO question as to which direction he would loyally support.
There may have been some miscalls along the way. There may be some who were judged by others to be corruptible who actually--when the tough calls came--were NOT corruptible.
Overall though, this is how TSCC has been run since its beginnings (later intensified dramatically by the era of Brigham Young). [One of the reasons why the Mark Hoffman story is so riveting is that it illustrates, in real life, how this TSCC organizational culture plays out when an unanticipated, real life, organizational crisis occurs.]
When you next see General Conference, look at each of the main speakers and realize that THEY, as individuals, were judged [potentially, at the very least] corruptible, by multiple TSCC leaders, on multiple occasions, as they each rose the organizational ladder to being able to give that speech.
Kind of fun, eh???
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/14/2014 05:25PM by tevai.