I don't see how LDS, Inc. survives without a change to their tontine system of governance. This year, they've hit near 0% growth, which is probably negative growth when inactivity is taken into account.

It's absurd to have a 90 year old at the head of a major institution. It's even more absurd that his successor is 93. Why choose someone based on longevity? They will never had a spry, vigorous leadership by empowering people well past the median life expectancy.

One basic change would be a mandatory retirement at 80. They already have that for 70s, so why not the top? Then have the 12 elect a President, not just pick the next guy in seniority. That's how the Pope is chosen, and now the Pope can retire when he gets too old do the job.

Without this change, they are just going to continue to be stuck in their mid-20th century mentality. Nelson is a Korean war vet. Millennials were born after M*A*S*H went off the air. How can he relate to their problems and issues?

The LDS Church was founded by a young man who died in his 30s. Now it's led by men in their 90s. They have fossilized the church due to their own personal obsolescence.

I had to look up "tontine." After doing so, I remembered that I'd seen the word before.

In this case, such an apt description! :)

Col Potter had a tontine of a wine bottle with his WWI buddies.

by Thomas Costain. Long, 2 large volumes.

However, I appreciate the reference to the books by Thomas Costain. I have liked everything of his that I've read. I will have to check out The Tontine, if I can find it.

"The Black Rose" was a terrific novel, and made into a good movie, starring Tyrone Power and Jack Hawkins. (Yeah, it's THAT old, but well worth finding.) I believe he also wrote a non-fiction historical series called "The Last Plantagenets," which isn't all that fascinating unless that royal English dynasty appeals to you, which it does to me.

Yes, he did. I read The Tontine but dont remember it well.I think I was in middle school so it has been a long time. Loved The Black Rose but not the movie. As I remember I was disappointed because it didnt follow the book

Remember Samuel Shellebarger(sp?) also from that era? They all wrote some terrific swashbuckler romantic novels! Probably why I'm so out of step in the current era...

clearly & plainly stuck in the past, very little Rudder effectiveness, more by the keel (yes, I'm a sailor).

if they were to pick the best person to expand their business /church who would that be ? I'd pick Good old good guy Dieter . Hell he almost has me believing again . Oaks,will make it his own little Oakdom . I really do not like one D Oaks . At all.

I think he has the potential to be the worst Tyrant/Prick in church history.

In a gerontocracy of "yes-men," he is young enough and intelligent enough to set the Quorum of Bobbleheads a-bobbin' with eagerness to acquiesce to anything he proposes.

I think he is, at heart, a dictatorial, merciless tyrant who would set the entire institution back to the days of BY, insofar as that might be possible, given the passage of history.

He won't be healthy for the church, nor for the State of Utah, which suffers because it is the heart of the Morridor.

I have to step back, breathe, and remind myself that on the grand scale of things, the Mormon Church really doesn't amount to much. North Korea, say, is a much scarier problem. But NK's inhabitants are not there voluntarily. Mormons are.

An interesting post, which brings up equally interesting questions.

First, the fact that Joseph Smith was in his 30s when he ran the church is not necessarily a recommendation for youth. After all, he almost destroyed his creation multiple times through impulsive decisions and policies. Brigham Young, followed later by the change in tithing policy, was probably more responsible for the survival of Mormonism. Modern apologists (Hinckley) would say that having old men run the church gives it stability and, to some degree, they are correct.

Second, it is easy to overstate the importance of the gerontocracy in managing the church. Bureaucracies largely run themselves; and there is certainly a "deep state" in the LDS church that keeps things chugging along in more or less the same direction. The need for consensus in the Q15 before changing policy has much the same effect. But perhaps most important is that the church often functions as a sort of regency, in which younger people make the real decisions. Hinckley did that for most of two or three decades before becoming president himself, and Monson probably wasn't sentient for years. So we have a very conservative institution that is not wholly dependent on its senior leadership.

Finally, while it would probably help on the margin to lower the median age of the apostles by 20 years, I'm not confident it would materially improve the church's outlook. For no matter how young and creative the leadership, they are still dealing with demonstrably false history and doctrine and with an appalling record regarding race, gender, gender identity, and politics. There may consequently be little room for productive change. On the one hand, younger leaders might reassert the traditional Mormon vision and lose still more appeal to outsiders; or renounce the past "mistakes" and watch more core believers drift into inactivity or join the Snufferites.

It could be that today's course is more or less the best option left. Advance won't work, and retreat could become rout. Perhaps the winning strategy is therefore to try to stem the membership losses and continue growing the financial portfolio.

Not sure about that. The church is set up to reward yes-men and asshats with ever-larger fiefdoms to rule. There must be younger men among the junior GAs who promise to be as hardline as Bednar. (I've heard Aidukaitis [57] and Klebingat [50] mentioned as prospective dark lords.) Those are the types who are likely to be elevated. Younger doesn't necessarily mean better.

An attribute of the current system is it effectively eliminates the savage politicking found in "voting" entities like the Catholic Curia or a communist Politburo. Succession is worked out short of murder. Personally, I'd be for whatever promotes a more rapid demise of the cult.

[edit note] As pertains to who's top dog only, not what policies get championed, etc.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2018 07:40PM by Void K. Packer.

You mean like younger leaders!?? People in their 30's-40's!?? It'll never happen. The old leaders would never allow it to happen!!

I want it to continue as it is. It does a marvelous job of waking up members to leave the sinking ship of Zion. Maybe, they could invoke an age requirement to only be called a prophet when they reach the age of 100.

Greed does weird things to men. It's like a drug, and they don't want the high to end. These men fight aging tooth and nail. The problem is that they age fighting. Retirement is surrender. They
can't surrender.

I'm glad they select old men. They die quicker and have less time to do damage.

Mormon prophets don't laugh, live or lead. They just get old waiting for conference and then die.

Politically and Socially Utah is decades behind the majority of the developed world and all major church leaders are born, raised and groomed in that environment. Unless the "global" church truly begins being representative of the modern world and not just Utah, nothing will change.