Church, Leadership, Priesthood, Prophets

Remove the prophet

In the October 1890 general conference, Wilford Woodruff stated the following:

The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place

My question to the readers is how will the Lord remove the prophet from his place? How do we know this will happen?

Published by

Kim Siever

Queer Mormon poet with radical political views. I have been married 27 years, and we have 6 children. Sunday school president. Served in the Utah Provo Mission.

96 thoughts on “Remove the prophet”

  4. It will simply be that the prophet will die earlier than God had scheduled for him to die. Most likely it will just be natural death and we will not know that God did it. It makes interesting speculation for prophets who were prophets for a really short time (Lee and Hunter), but I think it is something that God will never tell us.

  6. I’m totally unstudied here, but is there a reason most responses to this question seem to jump so quickly to death being the method of removal?

    What of excommunication?

  10. HBL did say the blacks would never recieve the priesthood as long as he was alive. Makes one wonder.

    When was the last time an apostle was exed anyway? I think we’re overdue for a purge.

  11. Would the president make his way through the ranks of the Twelve without influencing any of the other Twelve? I am doubtful that the Twelve would excommunicate the prophet.

  12. Wilford Woodruff’s quote is pretty clear that it is the Lord who removes the wayward prophet and not the Twelve. The Lord’s got a pretty good, sure-fire way to remove a prophet from his position that would negate all possible influences from any members of the Twelve. Nothing like the Great Equalizer.

  13. A purge?

    I certainly don’t think so. The First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve have been called under inspiration and I have a strong testimony that they are where they should be.

  14. I am doubtful that the Twelve would excommunicate the prophet.

    Do you not have faith that the Twelve and whoever else is part of the mechanism in place to take care of a wayward President would do the Lord’s bidding?

    I think your concern is a legitimate one, but it introduces some interesting follow-up questions, yes?

    Wilford Woodruff’s quote is pretty clear that it is the Lord who removes the wayward prophet and not the Twelve.

    Forgive me, but I don’t see the clarity at all. It’s been a long time since I’ve read this quote in it’s entirety, so I’m not certain about this, but I don’t recall any specific process, be it death or excommunication by the Twelve, being mentioned at all by Brother Woodruff.

    The thing I keep thinking is that the Twelve are just as much God’s representatives here on earth as is the Prophet. Whether it is God who strikes the Prophet down or the Twelve that excommunicates him, it is God doing the deed.

    The danger I see is that many members assume that death is the action that will be taken. I think this belief makes members comfortable to relieve themselves of the responsibility to learn for themselves whether or not a Prophet is indeed speaking for God.

    I dunno. Just thinking out loud.

  15. Do you not have faith that the Twelve and whoever else is part of the mechanism in place to take care of a wayward President would do the Lord’s bidding?

    You mean like the faith that the president of the church won’t lead us astray?

  16. “And inasmuch as a President of the High Priesthood shall transgress, he shall be had in remembrance before the common council of the church, who shall be assisted by twelve counselors of the High Priesthood;
    And their decision upon his head shall be an end of controversy concerning him.
    Thus, none shall be exempted from the justice and the laws of God, that all things may be done in order and in solemnity before him, according to truth and righteousness.”
    (D&C 107:82-84)

  17. Suppose the Prophet did something that was not correct, how could he be exed if he said “Thus saith the Lord”?

    The 12 would have a major problem to overcome would they not?

    What if the P said Thus saith the Lord – Blacks cannot hold the PH. Or Thus saith the Lord, Righteous men should have more than 1 wife or thus saith the lord (you add the example).

    What checks and balances are in place to keep something like this happening in the future?

    I would hate to see current doctrine being decided upon in the future to not be doctrinal sound.

    I can just see it now “Thus saith the Lord – Cola is to be used in the place of Sacrament water for it truly is the Lord drink of choice”.

    I just bought a 1,000 shares of cola stock just to be on the safe side.

  18. You mean like the faith that the president of the church won’t lead us astray?

    Heh, heh.

    I guess if it were discovered that the President had attempted to lead the Church astray that it would be quite normal to then question one’s faith in the rest of the Priesthood… among other things.

    So I guess that would be another good question… how would my faith in the Church be impacted if a Prophet were removed for attempting to lead the Church astray?

    I think it all would depend on how close to God and His Spirit I am… because if I am where I am supposed to be, will the removal come as any surprise at all?

    Thanks for the scripture Mark… which has me thinking of another question. Does anybody know who would be the one to bring the charges? I’m assuming anybody can and wouldn’t doubt if it happens quite often.

    (Apologies if I’m tossing too many thoughts and questions out all at once.)

  19. Does anybody know who would be the one to bring the charges?

    Good question. Especially considering that we are not to speak ill of the Lord’s anointed.

  20. The Benson guy who left the church (I beleived he was exed for speaking against the brethren) because his grandfather the Prophet was ill and church leaders where promoting the concept that his grandfather was still leading the church when in fact the man had no clue what was happening.

    Would this count as leading us astray? Or was it a white lie since we (the members) could not handle the truth?

    What say ye?

  23. Bill, Steve Benson resigned his membership to the church and was not excommunicated.

    His reasons include the deception of the LDS membership as well as an opposition about how the church has (not) handled the evolution debate.

    He also had a series of interviews with church leaders who could not sufficiently answer questions he had about the church’s operation.

    /off soapbox =)

    I think it was a clear example of leading the members astray. If I tell you someone is not near death, and they actually are, it’s pretty clear that I am misleading you – leading you astray.

    I am very pro-‘getting eaten by a whale’ as a method of removing a living prophet. That idea has got a lot of pinache.

  24. After careful consideration, I’d also like to propose a large lightning bolt out of the blue as a method of vapourizing the current prophet, should he lead the members astray.

    That would also be another great way to go.

    It’d also be a clear way of sending a message to the membership.

    Additionally if the rest of the seventy don’t want to stand too close to the prophet when he’s outdoors, you’ll know something’s up…

  25. The truth is that no one can oppose the Prophet. That person would be exed. The rest of the Quorum of the 12 are not going to risk their high positions if the Prophet was wrong. Ignore the problem and someday they might live long enough to be the head guy.

  26. Guys,

    Any member of age during that time was in complete denial (and most were) not to realize Preses Kimball and Benson were disabled due to natural causes for a number of years at the end of their lives. In such cases, the senior functioning counselor in the 1st pres is the defacto head of the church. Pres Kimball was even embarrassingly propped in a chair at one conference in the early 80’s drooling, and I can remember being pilloried after that conference for suggesting in SS that the church should kindly release him. In the Benson case, Steve Benson’s father was actively involved in “protecting” Pres Benson’s image, a cause Steve wanted not part in. I believe Steve Benson’s major beef was/is that we have no retirement/release provisions for apostles which resulted in a needless cruelty imposed on his Grandfather and the family. On that score, I agree with him 100%, both that there should be a retirement tradition for apostles and clearly disabled apostles, including church preses, should be released. It is maddening that GBH served through those difficult times as the defacto head of the church, and no actions have been taken to prevent recurrence. Steve Benson has gone off the deep end on a lot of stuff, but he’s on the money here.

  27. I think we should leave this decision up to the Lord. The prophet is the prophet, and we have the first presidencey and the quorum of the twelve to take care of necessary church direction. Unless we are right there, we are not in a position to decide whether any leader is not able to function in this calling. There is no problem, the other brethren have the ability, the keys and the authority to run the church without putting it all or even partially on the shoulders of the president of the church. It isn’t up to the members to release the prophet. It is up to the Lord, and if He doesn’t choose to do so I don’t see why anyone should have any argument with that.

  28. The prophet will simply never go against the Lord. It can’t and won’t happen. It’s as simple as that, in spite of our musings.

  29. Larry,

    I think that “Going against the Lord” and “Leading the church astray” are two separate things.

    In fact, we have scriptural evidence of prophets going against the Lord.

    It is possible for the prophet to go against the Lord, but not lead the church astray.

  30. JM is right. Actually Joseph Smith himself did it when he kept asking the Lord for permission to give the translated pages to Martin Harris. He was told no, more than once, and finally the Lord let him do it, but it’s pretty clear this wasn’t His will. Prophets are human after all, and as we are, are allowed their agency to make choices. Even idiotic ones at times.

    However I haven’t seen any prophets since then make choices like that :)

  31. Just because you havent seen them, doesn’t mean they havent happened.

    And for the record, when we say prophet during the course of this thread, are we talking about the president of the church, or all those we sustain as prophets, seers and revilators?

  33. I am referring to President.

    JM, I am aware they may make stupid choices even though I haven’t seen them.

    When I refer to prophet I only mean the presiding one at the time.

  34. We would need a new primary song if this ever happened.

    Perhaps something like (I just picked a name out of the blue… not meant to reference anyone in particular):

    Jensen was a prophet
    Worst one that we know
    In the land of Utah
    Not so long ago

    Jensen had ideas
    That were kinda strange
    Bretheren didn’t like them
    voted for a change

    Don’t follow that prophet
    Don’t follow that prophet
    Don’t follow that prophet
    He went astray

    Don’t follow that prophet
    Don’t follow that prophet
    Don’t follow that prophet
    Or else you’ll pay!!!

  35. Comments 20 and 23 accuse the leadership of the Church of lying about President Benson’s condition and promoting the idea that he was fully in charge.

    Rubbish.

    Here’s an example of what the leaders were actually saying:

    People throughout the Church are naturally anxious to know of the President’s condition. President Benson is now in his ninety-fifth year. As we have previously said from this and other pulpits, he suffers seriously from the effects of age and illness and has been unable to fulfill important duties of his sacred office. This is not a situation without precedent. Other Presidents of the Church have also been ill or unable to function fully in the closing months or years of their lives. It is possible that this will happen again in the future.

    The principles and procedures which the Lord has put in place for the governance of His church make provision for any such circumstance. It is important, my brethren, that there be no doubts or concerns about the governance of the Church and the exercise of the prophetic gifts, including the right to inspiration and revelation in administering the affairs and programs of the Church, when the President may be ill or is not able to function fully.

    The First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles, called and ordained to hold the keys of the priesthood, have the authority and responsibility to govern the Church, to administer its ordinances, to expound its doctrine, and to establish and maintain its practices. Each man who is ordained an Apostle and sustained a member of the Council of the Twelve is sustained as a prophet, seer, and revelator. Like those before him, President Benson was the senior Apostle at the time he was called as President of the Church. His Counselors were drawn from the Council of the Twelve. Therefore, all incumbent members of the Quorum of the First Presidency and of the Council of the Twelve have been the recipients of the keys, rights, and authority pertaining to the holy apostleship.

    When the President is ill or not able to function fully in all of the duties of his office, his two Counselors together comprise a Quorum of the First Presidency. They carry on with the day-to-day work of the Presidency. In exceptional circumstances, when only one may be able to function, he may act in the authority of the office of the Presidency as set forth in the Doctrine and Covenants, section 102, verses 10–11 [D&C 102:10–11].

    When, on 10 November 1985, President Benson called his two Counselors, it was he himself who was voice in setting them apart, with the members of the Council of the Twelve Apostles also laying their hands upon the heads of the Counselors, each one in turn, as he was set apart. President Benson was at the time in good health, fully able to function in every way.

    Furthermore, following this setting apart, he signed with his own hand powers of agency giving each of his Counselors the authority to direct the business of the Church.

    Under these specific and plenary delegations of authority, the Counselors in the First Presidency carry on with the regular work of this office. But any major questions of policy, procedures, programs, or doctrine are considered deliberately and prayerfully by the First Presidency and the Twelve together. These two quorums, the Quorum of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve, meeting together, with every man having total freedom to express himself, consider every major question.

    And now I quote again from the word of the Lord: “And every decision made by either of these quorums must be by the unanimous voice of the same; that is, every member in each quorum must be agreed to its decisions, in order to make their decisions of the same power or validity one with the other” (D&C 107:27).

    No decision emanates from the deliberations of the First Presidency and the Twelve without total unanimity among all concerned.

    I add by way of personal testimony that during the twenty years I served as a member of the Council of the Twelve and during the nearly thirteen years that I have served in the First Presidency, there has never been a major action taken where this procedure was not observed.

    This procedure obtains even in the absence of the President of the Church. I hasten to add, however, that the Brethren would not be inclined to do anything which they feel would be out of harmony with the attitude, feelings, and position of their beloved leader, the prophet of the Lord.

    It must be recognized that the President, when he became the senior Apostle, had moved up through the ranks of seniority over a period of many years of service in the Quorum of the Twelve. During this time, his Brethren came to know him well. During the years of his ministry, he expressed himself on the many issues that came before that quorum. His views became well known. Those who love him, respect him, sustain and honor him as President of the Church and prophet, seer, and revelator of the Lord would not be disposed to go beyond what they recognize his position would be on any issue under consideration.

    Now brethren, let it be understood by all that Jesus Christ stands at the head of this church which bears His sacred name. He is watching over it. He is guiding it. Standing at the right hand of His Father, He directs this work. His is the prerogative, the power, the option to call men in His way to high and sacred offices and to release them according to His will by calling them home. He is the Master of life and death. I do not worry about the circumstances in which we find ourselves. I accept these circumstances as an expression of His will. I likewise accept the responsibility, acting with my Brethren, to do all we can to move forward this holy work in a spirit of consecration, love, humility, duty, and loyalty.

    (Gordon B. Hinckley, “God Is at the Helm,” Priesthood Session, April 1994 General Conference)

    These excerpts don’t do it justice. For the full talk, see this link:

    http://www.lds.org/portal/site/LDSOrg/menuitem.b12f9d18fae655bb69095bd3e44916a0/?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=9a54425e0848b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1

  36. Wow. A talk from the lds.org site clears the church of wrongdoing. Unimaginable.

    They were using an auto-pen to sign his name to personal and professional correspondence to give the impression he was functioning better than he actually was – and that he had agreed to the contents.

    That is a clear case of deception no matter how you try to colour it.

  37. Rick, the Presidents of the Church have used auto-pens, just like executives in other organizations, for a long time, regardless of whether they were well or ill. There’s too much to sign. Every time a missionary call gets sent out from Salt Lake City, it bears the signature of the President of the Church. He wouldn’t have time to do all that signing if he wanted to. It has no relationship at all to whether he is incapacitated or not.

    The talk from President Hinckley, given during President Benson’s incapacity, shows that he was doing exactly the opposite of what you say he was doing. He was openly acknowledging that President Benson was unable to perform most of the duties of his calling. I don’t know why you think it should be ignored because it’s been archived on lds.org.

  38. It has no relationship at all to whether he is incapacitated or not.

    It also makes it hard to determine if he is incapacitated or not.

    I don’t know why you think it should be ignored because it’s been archived on lds.org.

    Which would explain why you are a member and I am not.

  39. I see. So when there’s a historical record of a talk on that web site, the fact that the talk can be found on a Church web site should cause right-thinking people to ignore it.

    The record of that talk, and the time in which it was given, proves that President Hinckley was publicly acknowledging President Benson’s incapacity (and thus that your accusations against him are, once again, worthless).

  40. The record of that talk, and the time in which it was given do nothing to discount the first-hand knowledge of a witness to events; specifically when the talk is written by one of the perpetrators of the events in question.

  41. “The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place”

    Forgive me if I am wrong but I did notice if the thread has discussed if this statement is doctrine or Wilford Woodruff’s opinion. If it is his opinion then is this saying simply church tradition and not doctrinal?

  42. “If it is his opinion then is this saying simply church tradition and not doctrinal?” as per Pewsitter

    It’s just common sense. At least that’s what I think.

  43. the talk is written by one of the perpetrators of the events in question.

    …who cleverly deceived the world into thinking Ezra Taft Benson was in full charge of his faculties, by giving a public address in which he publicly announced the opposite to the entire world?

    Are you even trying to make sense?

  44. The record of that talk, and the time in which it was given do nothing to discount the first-hand knowledge of a witness to events

    The events in question were the Church’s public pronouncements about President Benson’s condition. The talk is one of the events. I was an eyewitness to it. But you’re trying to discount my first-hand knowledge for the patently absurd reason that when I (unlike you) provided documentary proof of my claim, I happened to get it from a Church web site.

    I’m surprised you still have any straws left to grasp.

  45. “If it is his opinion then is this saying simply church tradition and not doctrinal?”

    It’s just common sense. At least that’s what I think.

    Common Sense does not make it a true statement. I say this because God allows unrighteous men to live as well as the righteous. This statement has given the anti group lots of leaway. For example, they claim that since BY was wrong about blacks, multi wives, etc that BY could not be a Prophet because he taught false doctrine.

    Which is why I asked if this statement is doctrine or just a tradition the LDS members believe?

  46. I still think it is common sense.

    Personally I don’t care what antis think, they can blather on all they want. I just care about my testimony.

    Who knows if it is doctrine or tradition? Why does it matter? If we have the Spirit to lead us, then that’s all that is important. Sometimes faith has to come into play.

  47. Doctrine or tradition matters because doctrine leaves little room for mistakes while tradition can be wrong. Your husband has used the Doctrine vs Tradition several times to explain old doctrine that has been changed. You cannot simply have it both ways depending upon the topic.

    Being wrong does not remove the mantle of Prophet. Infalliable creates problems.

    Why would you reject truth if it comes to you via antis or perhaps even someone like Rick who claims to not believe?

    If an anti were to tell you that Joseph Smith read a rock as opposed to gold plates and reading a rock was the truth, would it make it less true because he did not believe the same items you do?

    Would it make it more less true that Joseph Smith read a rock instead of gold plates because you wanted to believe he read plates of gold instead of a rock?

    Traditions are not always true.

  48. I meant in reference to this question. I know that in certain instances, doctrine versus tradition is important.

    I don’t go to someone who has an agenda against the church to find out truth. Rick is not anti. I don’t have a problem with someone who does not accept it, I do have a problem with people whose sole purpose is to discredit. That isn’t teaching truth. I wouldn’t go to anyone who has a grudge or hatred for another religion to find out the truth about it. Kind of defeats the purpose of learning the truth.

    Antis are not interested in anything that is positive about the church. And they don’t have have a problem with twisting the truth to fit their purposes. So no, there is no truth to be found from antis. Even Satan can tell the truth.

  49. Wow, most of these comments are pretty scary. I might suggest some testimonies that could use some strengthening. do you not believe that the Lord has the power to still work through a man even if for daily intents and purposes he seemingly does not function? Seems like that was Steve Benson’s problem.

    I would like to thank ltbugaf for the comments. Do you remember the Lamanite member of the 12 that was accused of wrong doing? where did he go? He kind of disappeared. I think some of these comments that have been made are a bit blasphemous. We may never have the answers to these specific questions, does it really matter if you pray and you have peace in your heart of what is going on?

  50. Janet, I think you may be referring to Elder George P. Lee of the First Quorum of the Seventy, who was excommunicated. The reasons for the excommunication were, as always, kept private.

Comments are closed.