I was saddened to see Marlin K. Jensen given "Emeritus" status on Saturday. In other words, he was sacked for his comment about people leaving the Church "in droves."
Jensen was my stake president. He was absolutely genuine, and a true believer. I think he honestly believed that the "gospel" was strong enough to allow for scrutiny of troublesome doctrine and compassion for the excluded, including gay people. I think he's an example of what happens when you don't shut up and toe the party line
I don't think 70's are a life time calling, even presidency of the 70's, so wasn't it expected at some point that he'd be released unless he ever got called to the quorum of the 12?
Although, being a democrat, and perhaps his comments on people leaving in droves, maybe the timing is suspicious? Maybe, maybe not.
It's been standard policy since 1984 to retire First Quorum of Seventy at age 70. Also, Second Quorum of Seventy is a 5 year calling. Only Apostles have a lifetime calling.
I was responding to the OP’s assumption that Marlin K. Jensen was sacked and given emeritus status at this Oct. General Conference in consequence of his public comments about people leaving the Church. The presumption is that he would have continued in his position absent such public comments. Given that it is standard policy to retire a member of the First Quorum of the Seventy at the Oct. conference following their 70th birthday, the presumption is wrong.
The timing of the pending changing-of-the-guard is a different discussion. I’ll leave that discussion to the conspiracy theorists. edent
Members of the First Quorum of the Seventy are retired with emeritus status at the Oct. conference following their 70th birthday. Marlin turned 70 in May of this year. Standard policy.
I stand corrected. I believe it was 1989 when this policy was enacted.
Is it standard to push them out of their responsibilities in January before their October release? The sacking of Marlin Jensen sure did get a lot of press. If this January happenstance is normal then who else did this happen to? If so then where are those news stories?
I was responding to the OP’s assumption that Marlin K. Jensen was sacked and given emeritus status at this Oct. General Conference in consequence of his public comments about people leaving the Church. The presumption is that he would have continued in his position absent such public comments. Given that it is standard policy to retire a member of the First Quorum of the Seventy at the Oct. conference following their 70th birthday, the presumption is wrong.
The timing of the pending changing-of-the-guard is a different discussion. I’ll leave that discussion to the conspiracy theorists.
I meant to say "The timing of the announcement of the pending changing-of-the-guard is a different discussion". The official changing-of-the-guard occurred in Aug. 1.
It is common for those who are ex members to speculate and be suspicious of the happenings surrounding this faith. When you feel as if information was withheld from you and then you find said information out, one tends to lack trust as things are not always as they seem to be or as one thinks they were.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/08/2012 12:44PM by suckafoo.
However, I believe that when we water down the very many real problems of the church with conjecture, hyperbole, and faulty logic it makes it harder for people to recognize that the LDS church is false.
Silly stuff like this thread and the LDS church is making a killing in profit from the missionary program monthly fee to families just make us look stupid and like we have no legitimate ground to stand on.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/08/2012 01:23PM by bc.
Just about everything can be traced back to money, power or sex, as someone on here once said. I pretty much agree with that assessment, in general.
It is a coincidence Marlin Jensen would have said people were leaving in droves then be retired; but part of me thinks he said that because he no longer gave a crap since he was retiring anyway.
Jensen feeling more able to speak freely about the issue at the end of his tenure may very well make sense.
However, conjecture that Jensen was put on emeritus status at exactly the same age as everyone else for the last 20+ years being because of his comments is clearly wrong.
He was our area president while I was on my mission. During a conference he spoke pretty candidly about how he never wanted to be a General Authority, and that he was glad that they were called the "70s" and not the "80s." A joke that we understood to mean that he was happy that he would be done when he was 70 unless he was called to be an Apostle. I am happy for him.
If any of you question -- look at the wikipedia article about Jensen. His birthday was in 1942 and this year was 2012. Go figure, 70 years is the norm when they get emeritus status.