"We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them -- even if they knew it was wrong. But such obedience as this is worse than folly to us. It is slavery in the extreme. The man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings until he turns from his folly.
"A man of God would despise this idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the Saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without any questions.
"When Elders [leaders] of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they [the leaders] have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves."
-- Joseph Smith, Jr.
Millenial Star, Archive Volume 14, Number 38, Pages 593-595

Unfortunately there are many church member who don't follow this wise advice from their own founder and when they find out through a sad experience that a church leader was wrong or is human, their testimony is shattered; sometimes causing them to decide to leave the religion.
"Never trust anyone over the age of 30". :-)

Would you know if there a link to an online source for this?

Bednar's famous "quick to observe" talk

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=266b49f833f3f010VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

"Sister Bednar and I are acquainted with a returned missionary who had dated a special young woman for a period of time. He cared for her very much, and he was desirous of making his relationship with her more serious. He was considering and hoping for engagement and marriage. This relationship was developing during the time that President Hinckley counseled the Relief Society sisters and young women of the Church to wear only one earring in each ear.

"The young man waited patiently over a period of time for the young woman to remove her extra earrings, but she did not take them out. This was a valuable piece of information for this young man, and he felt unsettled about her nonresponsiveness to a prophet’s pleading. For this and other reasons, he ultimately stopped dating the young woman, because he was looking for an eternal companion who had the courage to promptly and quietly obey the counsel of the prophet in all things and at all times. The young man was quick to observe that the young woman was not quick to observe.

"I presume that some of you might have difficulty with my last example. You may believe the young man was too judgmental or that basing an eternally important decision, even in part, upon such a supposedly minor issue is silly or fanatical. Perhaps you are bothered because the example focuses upon a young woman who failed to respond to prophetic counsel instead of upon a young man. I simply invite you to consider and ponder the power of being quick to observe and what was actually observed in the case I just described. The issue was not earrings!"

Yes, the issue is not earrings! The issue is knee-jerk, blind obedience to leaders--"to promptly and quietly obey the counsel of the prophet in all things and at all times."

Of course at some time in the future Mormons will bristle when you quote Hinckley to them. They will say, "He was just speaking as a man, he didn't say 'thus saith the Lord' did he?" Note that the "young man" in Bednar's example didn't talk to the girl about this problem that HE had. He just judged her to not be "promptly and quietly [obedient to] the counsel of the prophet in ALL things and at ALL times."

Bednar's point is a total negation of Joseph Smith's point.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/02/2010 12:49AM by baura.

Joe really said that? Funny, he sure didn't follow through on those statements.

if his words and his actions had only been in accord. Shame his actions spoke louder than his words.

I think it's interesting. For an "uneducated" farmboy, Joe sure had an expansive vocabulary. Does anyone know if many other "uneducated" 19th century persons spoke with similar vocabulary?