October 2015 Conference Summary – What does it really mean?

…I agree that the leaders are concerned about the genreral trend away fro organized religion in the last couple of generations, but the statements we have now are no more strident or frequent than what I heard as a youth and young adult. Seriously, how is anything said in this conference different than Elder McConkie’s talks – and many others during my lifetime? The current ones at least sound sincerely concerned about people, whereas many of the former ones sounded almost arrogant and dismissive…Compare, “Stay on the good ship Zion to avoid danger,” to, “If some people are weak and get eaten by predators, it’s okay – since the caravan moves on.” The first is a plea directly to people who are struggling; the second is a reassuring statement to those who are not struggling that their lives are fine even as others die around them die…I look to tone a lot, and, as you know and expect, I read the tone differently than you do. I agree with the point that they are concerned, but I disagree completely that the idea that they are more concerned than others in the past is a negative thing. I actually like the real concern for people I see in many of their statements, even when I don’t agree with some of the solutions being proposed…

The main difference I see between McConkie, Benson, or even Packer and Perry just six months ago and now is basically what sounded like a general feeling of security (overconfident or not) whereas now some of their comments sound like they are almost in state of desperation by comparison. I’m not saying it is a negative thing that they are showing more concern on more fronts at the same time than they typically have in the past, I just think it is an interesting turn of events and to be honest I’m actually glad they are at least paying some attention to these reasons many are dissatisfied or struggling in the Church if they haven’t left already.

However, where I think they have made a major miscalculation in their reaction to these perceived threats or problems is the general idea that members that are dissatisfied with the Church must have done something wrong as if not having a temple recommend, being lax about the Sabbath day, not reading the scriptures, etc. caused their dissatisfaction and doubts when in reality I think the more common case for long-time active members that fall away is that their dissatisfaction and/or doubts came first and not caring as much about temple recommends, scriptures, strict obedience, etc. came after that. In fact, it sounds like they are largely ignoring the idea of leaving the 99 and trying to save the one lost sheep the way Jesus taught because they are more concerned with even more members losing their testimonies than anything else so their focus at this point is mostly on trying to prevent existing active members from losing faith (stop the bleeding) and telling themselves and others that the reasons disaffected members left or lost faith are not valid and they were supposedly just weak, lazy, sinful, etc.

Usually it is hard for me to tell one General Conference apart from the rest because so many of the talks typically involve simply repeating so many of the same ideas they have already been saying for at least the last 20 years.

If this isn’t the direction you want the thread to go, just let this comment go, but I’ll have to disagree that this conference was indistinguishable from all others. I don’t think BRM would ever have said to “give Brother Joseph a break.” I think it was a woefully inadequate statement that Elder Anderson didn’t develop, but it’s as close as we’ve ever come to addressing JS’ personal conduct in General Conference. (At least in my memory of things.)

Re. the one vs. the ninety and nine: I don’t want to just squash the beauty of caring for the one, but I’m wondering how the story goes when it’s the twenty and the eighty. When the 99 don’t stay put in a clump while you go after the one, there’s probably a different calculation that goes on, a different technique for handling the 80, the 75….

My original idea for this thread was simply to explain what stood out the most about conference to me and if anyone wants to share their overall impressions of conference, different from mine or not, I would definitely like to hear what they thought about it and why. Actually, I wasn’t trying to say this conference was the same as the rest; what I meant by that was that until now most of the previous conferences seemed very similar. In fact my main point was actually that this one really did stand out from the rest to me because of the especially defensive tone of so many of the talks as if they now feel like the Church is completely under siege in many different ways both inside and outside the active membership and it sounds like they are really starting to notice that they are losing control of the narrative, beliefs, and behaviors for many members compared to the way it used to be when it was easier for them to simply tell members what to do and believe and have a higher percentage of them readily accept what they were told without much resistance. For example, look at the following quotes that I see as direct reactions to some of perceived problems or threats to the Church that I listed before.

Satan, our adversary, wants us to fail. He spreads lies as part of his effort to destroy our belief. He slyly suggests that the doubter, the skeptic, the cynic is sophisticated and intelligent, while those who have faith in God and His miracles are naive, blind, or brainwashed. Satan will advocate that it is cool to doubt spiritual gifts and the teachings of true prophets…Brethren, let me be clear: there is nothing noble or impressive about being cynical. Skepticism is easy—anyone can do it. It is the faithful life that requires moral strength, dedication, and courage. Those who hold fast to faith are far more impressive than those who give in to doubt when mysterious questions or concerns arise.

we need women who know how to make important things happen by their faith and who are courageous defenders of morality and families in a sin-sick world.

If one believes that all roads lead to heaven or that there are no particular requirements for salvation, he or she will see no need for proclaiming the gospel or for ordinances and covenants in redeeming either the living or the dead. But we speak not just of immortality but also of eternal life, and for that the gospel path and gospel covenants are essential. And the Savior needs a church to make them available to all of God’s children—both the living and the dead.

Much has been written and said about today’s generation of young adults. Research shows that many resist organized religion. Many are in debt and unemployed. A majority like the idea of marriage, but many are reluctant to take that step. A growing number don’t want children. Without the gospel and inspired guidance, many are wandering in strange paths and losing their way…The track that leads to marriage passes through the terrain called dating!…When you date, learn everything you can about each other…Do you share the same feelings about the commandments, the Savior, the priesthood, the temple, parenting, callings in the Church, and serving others?…Speaking plainly, please don’t date all through your 20s just to “have a good time,” thus delaying marriage in favor of other interests and activities. Why? Because dating and marriage aren’t final destinations. They are the gateway to where you ultimately want to go…If you don’t have abundant resources, don’t worry…To be ready for marriage, make certain you are worthy to take the sacrament and hold a temple recommend…

How can it make sense for the organization, from a structural standpoint?

By asking individual members to be the shepherds finding and reaching out to the one.

Thus, “The Rescue” is born.

We can critique the terminology and methods, and the program approach to many of those methods, but it is hard to criticize the concept of rescuing those not among us in light of the parable of the 99 and the 1. Many of those “lost” might not want to be rescued, but that is impossible to know without the effort – and people can complain if the attempt occurs (“They won’t leave me alone.”) or if it doesn’t (“They don’t really care about me enough to try to help me.”). We have had people her express both of those feelings, so all the leaders can do is try to reach the 1-20 in whatever way seems possible.

I did not watch much of conference but I do remember that some others commenters were noting the sense of “defensiveness” from this conference.

Re. the one vs. the ninety and nine: I don’t want to just squash the beauty of caring for the one, but I’m wondering how the story goes when it’s the twenty and the eighty. When the 99 don’t stay put in a clump while you go after the one, there’s probably a different calculation that goes on, a different technique for handling the 80, the 75….

I also do not know how leaving the 99 can make sense for the leadership of a large organization. It can make sense for an itinerant minister like Jesus or even a borderlands website like StayLDS, but I can’t see it being successful for the whole of church leadership.

How can it make sense for the organization, from a structural standpoint?…By asking individual members to be the shepherds finding and reaching out to the one…Thus, “The Rescue” is born…We can critique the terminology and methods, and the program approach to many of those methods, but it is hard to criticize the concept of rescuing those not among us in light of the parable of the 99 and the 1. Many of those “lost” might not want to be rescued, but that is impossible to know without the effort – and people can complain if the attempt occurs (“They won’t leave me alone.”) or if it doesn’t (“They don’t really care about me enough to try to help me.”). We have had people her express both of those feelings, so all the leaders can do is try to reach the 1-20 in whatever way seems possible.

Well in terms of actual numbers for the Church it would probably be more like 64 lost “sheep” versus 36 still in the flock not counting those that are lost to the extent that the Church doesn’t even know what ward or branch they live in and some of them are already dead but still counted in the total membership number until they would have been 110 years old. On top of that, many of the ones still among the flock from the perspective of Church leaders are not there because they believe in the Church’s story but mostly for other reasons (e.g. for the sake of family and other relationships). But what I think is more important than the actual numbers is that it seems that if the flock was such a good place for the sheep to be in the first place then it shouldn’t be that hard to bring a sheep back to the fold and have it be happy to stay there after that.

Instead what we have with the Church is that many “sheep” wander away and find that they don’t need the flock and are just as happy to stay away from it. The same goes for the old ship Zion analogy. In reality it’s more like people bail out of the ship only to find that the water is only a few feet deep and they can easily walk to shore so they don’t need the ship anymore. I realize that some of these Church leaders are thinking of this in spiritual terms including supposed eternal consequences so that’s where some of the dramatic danger rhetoric is comming from where they are saying the Lord thinks this and Satan thinks that when neither is really here to state their case directly so we basically have what looks like ordinary men putting words in their mouths. Actually there was at least one talk about reactivation efforts, where Henry B. Eyring made the following comments in the Priesthood Session.

…you will see the Lord is in the work with you. I learned this from meeting an elders quorum president in a stake conference years ago. In the conference there were more than 40 names presented of men who were to receive the Melchizedek Priesthood…The stake president leaned over to me and whispered, “Those men were all less-active prospective elders.” In amazement, I asked the president what his program was to rescue these men…He pointed to a young man in the back of the chapel. He said, “There he is. Most of these men have been brought back because of that elders quorum president.”…I told the young man I was surprised by what he had done and asked him how he did it…he said softly, “I know every inactive guy in this town. Most of them have pickup trucks. I have a truck too. I wash my pickup where they wash theirs. In time, they become my friends…“Then I wait until something goes wrong in their lives. It always does. They tell me about it. I listen and I don’t find fault. Then, when they say, ‘There is something wrong in my life. There just has to be something better than this,’ I tell them what is missing and where they can find it. Sometimes they believe me, and when they do, I take them with me.”

However, I personally see this as not so much about concern for the inactive members as much as concern for the members serving in their callings feeling discouraged, demotivated, etc. It reminds me of high ranking business executives giving a pep talk for lower-level managers to try to boost their morale when sales are down and things look bleak. First of all, I would be more impressed by this story if it happened this last year instead of “years ago” (how many?). Second, if there was really something missing without the Church then it seems like it should be much easier for more people to tell the difference and want to be a part of it than what we see at this point so it sounds like this elders quorem president was just more friendly and likeable than average (results not typical). But of course if Church leaders don’t feel like they can change the basic product to make it more valuable and appealing to more people than it currently is then it’s no surprise that they will continue to tell rank-and-file members to try harder to buy into and sell the same old doctrines and policies no matter how often they simply do not work as well as advertized.

I think this conference was a step backwards. I know April was made easier by the Easter Connection. All of Sunday A.M. was Easter, but last conference we also had two talks about people who had left. Yes they were simple and could have been deeper, but a door of understanding was opened, this time nothing like that took place.

I don’t know if there is any meaning to it, but I can’t say I am all enthused by anything.

D. Todd Christofferson wrote:

If one believes that all roads lead to heaven or that there are no particular requirements for salvation, he or she will see no need for proclaiming the gospel or for ordinances and covenants in redeeming either the living or the dead. But we speak not just of immortality but also of eternal life, and for that the gospel path and gospel covenants are essential. And the Savior needs a church to make them available to all of God’s children—both the living and the dead.

What does God need with a starship? God shouldn’t need anything. This sort of thinking indicates to me that Jesus didn’t do enough. The endorsement of westernized man is required for universal salvation.