Any prediction on if the essays will be talked about?

After one talk I heard yesterday I was left thinking… forget a talk discussing info in one of the essays, I’m going to have to settle for talks not going directly against the essays. :angel:

Also, my lasting impression after the Saturday afternoon session left me wanting conference to turn into an opportunity for the leaders of the church to tell the world about Christ. Far too many talks seemed to be directly aimed at members and in some cases directly aimed at very specific members. I couldn’t help but think that if any non-member was watching conference then they probably caught a lot of messages that didn’t mean much for them. That’s when I realized that my desire to hear the essays mentioned during a session in conference went against my new desire.

Nibbler – I second your comment

my lasting impression after the Saturday afternoon session left me wanting conference to turn into an opportunity for the leaders of the church to tell the world about Christ. Far too many talks seemed to be directly aimed at members and in some cases directly aimed at very specific members. I couldn’t help but think that if any non-member was watching conference then they probably caught a lot of messages that didn’t mean much for them.

On one hand I cheered Dallin Oaks talk about loving people who aren’t like you, especially the idea of letting your kids play with non-members. I also cringed when I heard that, because it implies what I believe our culture has become – rude. Yet for many years now, even before faith crisis, I felt like General Conference talks were super insular. Sometimes, so microcosmic that they were Utah only talks. Other times just Anglo-Americana. I know much of it is based on 200 years of conditioning, but this is the same team that encourages us to flood the internet with our videos, memes, etc. Well here’s an idea dedicate conference to be a non-Mormon event. Speak Universally, Christian based, and leave white shirts, Joseph Smith and politics out of the discussion. Use the choir – Three cheers for NewLight – cool experience for you-and have them present the message in song. Something. This is the 21st Century, we are global, we claim to be have the worlds’ Prophet of the Lord. So break it out. Speak invitingly to the world.

Venting Done.

This morning during a meeting we discussed a communication from the Priesthood Department about the topics sections on LDS.org. We also discussed having this read during Gospel Doctrine and other sunday school classes.

Here is the message:

To help members with their study of Church history and doctrine, the Church

publishes reliable information on topics of current interest. This information is

found in the Gospel Topics section of the Church’s website, at lds.org/topics.

The purpose of the Gospel Topics section is to provide accurate and transparent

information on Church history and doctrine within the framework of faith. It

includes an article titled “Gospel Learning: Seek Learning by Study and Also by

Faith,” which explains principles of seeking truth.

When Church members have questions regarding Church history and doctrine,

possibly arising when detractors spread misinformation and doubt, you may want

to direct their attention to these resources. Also help them understand that prayer,

regular study of the scriptures and the teachings of the living prophets, the exercise

of faith, and humility are fundamental to receiving inspired answers to sincere

questions.

We talked about how Bishops and the SP have been getting more people coming into interviews with questions and concerns about church history, and how many of these members are “losing” their testimonies. There was some sympathy, but not a lot of understanding. There were the usual type of comments like “all this information has been around for decades, people think they have discovered something new”, Satan is causing people to doubt and causing them to lose their testimonies, “of course there are multiple versions of the first vision, no big deal”.

We talked about the essays on LDS.org but it was essentially, whatever these essays say is the final word. If people don’t believe in the essays their doubts are unfounded. I wasn’t surprised by the reactions, but I was hoping for a little more sympathy. I think the SP sincerely wants to help, but their help is that people need to read the scriptures and pray more. All the conflicting messages are just coming from anti-mormon upset ex-members.

We did talk about reading the essays in our wards because I brought it up. I also asked if we can do anything as a Stake to create a safe space for people with questions, but didn’t get a response in the affirmative, they said they are still discussing it. One comment was that Institute is that place (they obviously don’t understand the depth and paradigm shifting that occurs when the faith transition is happening).

We did talk about how many of these issues are being taught in seminary (like multiple accounts of the first vision as I have discussed in another thread). I talked specifically about how I had taught that to the Seminary kids and it didn’t seem like a big deal (inoculation I think is an appropriate strategy).

There was another comment and discussion about how members who think the church was hiding information are wrong and the general attitude among the group was that the Church just didn’t see it as important before but is now realizing that it is and so now they are addressing it.

Overall, I’m glad we were able to discuss some of this openly. Many of the people in the meeting seemed to know about some of the issue though I wonder who has actually read the essays in the Topics section. I hope I am not sounding overly critical, there are a lot of good people who attended the meeting doing the best they can. I would bet that almost none of them have been through the crucible of doubt and therefore lack an ability to understand those who are going or have undergone a faith transition, which is to be expected.

Thoughts from anyone?

I would bet that almost none of them have been through the crucible of doubt and therefore lack an ability to understand those who are going or have undergone a faith transition, which is to be expected.

Thoughts from anyone?

I think that hits the nail squarely on the head, SBRed. I have come to realize that those who have not seriously struggled with questions/doubt or been through a crisis or transition of faith simply cannot understand. Quoting from my upcoming talk: “There is a loneliness and sense of longing there that only those of us who have been there comprehend.”

I have been in those same kinds of meetings where there is clearly no understanding of those who struggle with these issues. And likewise few if any seem to have read the essays – in my experience I think only one besides me had read all of them and several had not read any. Still, like you, I’m glad the conversation was held.