Quote:
Originally Posted by ErikJohnson
I assume you meant tantamount when you wrote paramount, Maxel.
|
Yes, thanks for catching that- it was late when I wrote it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErikJohnson
None-the-less, you're in an awkward spot. On the one hand you've made clear AnthonyB's observation is inaccurate (post #29). And on the other, you say that a faithful LDS’s responsibility is to obey the prophet regardless of individual conscience or spiritual witness ("still living the commandments"—as you expressed it—which certainly includes obeying the prophet).
|
Your assumption that obeying the prophet in the face of moral objection is absolving the person of personal responsibility simply isn't true. The person's responsibility in this case is twofold:
1) Follow the ordained leader of God because the person has a
testimony of prophetic guidance
2) Pray to the Lord and seek wisdom from Him concerning the matter. The moral objection within the person needs to be an
informed objection- the person should study and pray concerning the matter.
The difference between what you're claiming and AnthonyB said- that the Lord absolves us of all personal responsibility when we're following the prohet- seems to be in the term "moral responsibility". Is it always our duty to act in accordance with our sometimes faulty conscience? We know that the heart can be deceitful, as can our most fervent desires- we're supposed to follow the scriptures from the Holy prophets. Does following the advice of the Bible- even against one's personal conscience- absolve a person of "moral responsibility"? Does following the words of Christ absolve us of "moral responsibility"?
One could argue there's a difference between following the advice found in the Bible and following the LDS prophets, but that's a matter of belief and not "moral responsibility".
If you still don't see the difference, I ask you to offer a definition of "moral responsibility" to facilitate dialogue.