Now that Monson seems to have lost his faculties, I think LDS, Inc. will be without a sentient leader for a long, long time.

Look at the ages of all the folks in the lineup --
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_Quorum_of_the_Twelve_Apostles_(LDS_Church)

I think its safe to assume that Packer, Perry and Nelson would all be pretty weak leaders if they were appointed to to post today. Packer, zilch. Perry, doesn't seem like he'd have been dynamic at his best, and at 91 I don't see him handling the reins with deftness. Nelson still looked okay in the video that came out a couple months ago. But, I think that its a safe bet that by the time the other three have kicked the bucket, he'll be wobbling and mumbling too.

But, looking at Perry and Nelson wandering around in a video (temple dedication? A couple months ago?) I think that one or the other of them could last a few more years. Suppose one of them stays around and occupies the top seat for another 8 years, until 2021.

*********

Oaks is 80 now, he'll be 88 in '21.

This is what he looks like now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDMRRjjoPzw
Still walks at a normal pace. Speaks without slurring, doesn't have that gravelly voice, can read his talk just fine. A little hunched in posture, perhaps.

But, will he still be sentient in 8 years? It seems likely, unless a stroke or something wipes him out. But even if he is, it seems unlikely he'd be a strong leader of LDS, Inc. It would take a year or two to try to clean out the phantom leaders, who will have been running the show unopposed for 8-12 years at that point.

So, maybe they'll have a sentient Oaks, wielding some sort of power, from 2022 until his faculties decline. But given that he'll be old, he might be frail, and LDS, Inc. will have been operated by phantoms for half a generation, I just don't see him being able to offer much in terms of conventional leadership. Plus his cog-dis seems to be pretty strong if he can say all the crap he says with a straight face. So, sentient, maybe. Strong, no.

*********

So, now its 2025, and Oaks 92 and is either dead or a puppet, and same with the next bunch in line -- Ballard would be 96, Scott 96, Hales is 92, Holland is only be 84. Eyring is 91, Uchdorf is 85. While Holland is the youngest, his health &/or leadership skills don't look so hot now, in terms of calling shots, enunciating, not getting bitten by rookie traps, etc. When he speaks today without a teleprompter he sounds like a dodo, so I don't think he'll have many faculties left in 12 years.

While none of these guys are going to be much of a leader if they're top dog, its also highly unlikely that they'll all be dead. Let's say that with modern life support systems one of these vegetables keeps breathing and pooping for 6 more years. Until 2031.

*********

Bednar will be a mere 79, probably perfectly coherent and somewhat capable of leading The Corporation, adoring members get to actually have a living, breathing prophet that can string sentences together without a script. & if we give him another 10 years before he loses capabilities, then that's a long period, long enough for him to change things around a bit, undertake a series of reforms, clean house, change a few policies, etc.

*********

So, what could go wrong with an organization without a leader for 18 years? Hmmm. Just a few things. It's kinda dead right now, they announce that the changing of missionary ages and putting missionaries on Facebook is a major game changer. But it isn't. Ladies can't wear extra earrings. Okay. Mormons no longer believe men will become Gods, okay.

As a case study of what goes wrong long-term with lack of leadership, they put out a new temple movie, but unlike the major changes of 1989 and 200?, they didn't change anything. Imagine if folks were still slitting their throats and getting felt near their privates by geezerettes. It would be a problem. But the leaders then anticipated it, and kept steering the good ship SS. LDS toward the future, at a pace that didn't upset the membership.

But now, the changes that should have happened to the temple flick for the next generation didn't. Like, not making women answer to their hubbies, with their hubbies not making a comparable oath in return. And shortening it a bit, perhaps. And putting the words back in about Adam and Eve being figurative. It wouldn't have killed them to do it, wouldn't have taken more time, and would have appeased the masses. But they missed it.

& they'll be missing pretty much every other required strategic adaptation for success as well. For 18 years.

**********

Anyhow, food for thought, and fodder for tactical maneuvers to outflank the LDS juggernaut.

Anyone have a different prediction?

Anyone have ideas on how we can use this likely leadership void to undermine the corporation?

RG



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/10/2013 03:58AM by reinventinggrace.

The church is going to kill itself with its gay standings as it is. It would also hemorrhage membership if it does allow gays in. It's going to be a heavy blow regardless and without a strong leader the membership is going to feel like God has lost his mind.

I agree jonathantech, tscc has really shot itself in the foot whichever way it goes now on the gay issue. Mind you a 'convenient' revelation could take care of it as it did the negro 'problem'. NOT!!!!!!!

But as for the leadership, I think they are looking increasingly foolish no matter who they are, and are loosing credibility every day.

LDS INC. will have a MORmON ASSpostHOLE running the show NO MATTER who is it is, at any given point in time.