- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Well, General Conference is coming in a couple days. I am speculating to myself, what do I expect from this Conference? New revelation?
New Policy or Program changes?
New Leadership? (that will be a yes.)
New buzz words?
New contemporary music? (no)
I’m drawing a blank. Does anyone else have any thoughts about what will be said?
I forgot: the Kirtland temple will be mentioned. Several times I’m sure.
Thanks for creating the thread MM. I’ll watch conference this weekend. My expectations are low and when they’re low it’s easier for me to spot the good bits.
Minyan Man wrote:
Does anyone else have any thoughts about what will be said?
I suspect it will be like most recent general conferences. I’ll find about 75% of it irrelevant to me. 5-10% good. 15-20% harmful. That’s about how they’ve all gone for me in the last decade.
I think when RMN was first called there was a flurry of activity/changes that I think he has wanted for a long time but didn’t have the power to do. I think he acted quickly because while his days are numbered, he doesn’t know the number and I think even he is a bit surprised at his longevity. Hence, I think after the flurry there has been a lot of nothing happening policy wise and I expect this conference to be very vanilla, much like those of the past couple years. I agree there will likely be multiple mentions of the Kirtland Temple and the church’s glee in taking ownership. I’m not sure we’ll hear any new buzzwords since “think celestial” only came last time. I expect we will hear that one with some frequency and I expect to lose count of how many times the now venerable “covenant path” will be uttered.
With the recent announcement they are releasing the first few hymns of the new hymnal soon we might get a “sneak peek” considering the choir director seems to be a main player in the hymnal revision.
We are very near the path of Monday’s total eclipse and have family coming to visit this weekend. Somewhat surprisingly DW is pretty nonchalant about this GC and we have activities planned for the weekend before the big day on Monday (we will travel the few miles to actually get to the path of totality Monday). GC is usually at least on at our house but it’s looking like this will be the first in a long time that it won’t be. I generally contribute “hits and misses” of GC on this forum, but I will likely be depending on others this time around.
It’s sounding like Pres. Nelson, and perhaps some others, may not be live and in person at GC: https://www.deseret.com/faith/2024/04/04/president-nelson-says-age-and-longevity-of-service-of-senior-latter-day-saint-leaders-is-cause-for-celebration/ ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://www.deseret.com/faith/2024/04/04/president-nelson-says-age-and-longevity-of-service-of-senior-latter-day-saint-leaders-is-cause-for-celebration/ Quote:“As senior leaders in the church, we are called to serve for the remainder of our lives, often long beyond ‘retirement age.’ This means that you may see some of us during general conference speak while sitting down, or pre-record our message to be shared at the appropriate time, or even require a little assistance getting to and from our seats in the conference center,” President Nelson said in a post shared on Instagram, Facebook and X.
Other than RMN, I would not be surprised to not see Pres. Eyring and Pres. Holland. While Pres. Oaks is also of advanced age his overall health appears to be a bit better than the rest if the presidency. The rest of the Q15 are relative youngsters.
I’m just curious, what is the basis for our “belief” that the GA’s are called for “the remainder of our lives”. Doesn’t God have more compassion then to require a person to serve beyond when it is a hardship for them or their
families? I cannot recall a scripture or a revelation that requires service to the “end”.
They must have a staff of people that support them & act in their behalf.
As far as I know the decision for the Q15 to serve until they die was a byproduct of the rules they came up with to determine succession. The apostle that’s been ordained as such the longest becomes the prophet. No fuss, no muss. Mother nature dictates who gets called to be prophet so there can be no criticisms or claims of political motivations.
That said, they called Bednar at a young enough age to all but guarantee that he’d become prophet some day, so political motivations can still factor into the equation.
It’s my understanding that anything below apostle (Q70) are retired at age 70. Meaning if you don’t make apostle, you don’t serve until you die. Once you hit apostleship, you become a victim of the succession rules and are locked in until you pass away.
Saturday morning, 1st hour: Elder Holland: Talk on some of his personal struggles of late. Losing his wife and health challenges shortly thereafter.
I did like the bit about people praying for his health and people praying just as hard for his wife’s health but there were different results. Those sentiments can chip away at the prosperity gospel.
He did mention that he would be with his wife again if he proved himself worthy. It’s sad that people genuinely believe that sort of thing. No one should be worried whether they’re worthy enough to be with loved ones.
Sister Dennis: A primary voice talk on coventants. This is the talk that many anticipated would happen with respect to getting members to be more diligent in garment wearing.
Elder Dushku: Retelling of the first vision focusing on the darkness right before the light of seeing… well it depends on which version of the first vision you’re reading
He also talked about being worthy enough to enjoy continuing to see rays of light. smh The worthiness rhetoric really is my pet peeve.
The crux of the talk is continuing to gather rays of light until you have a pillar of light.
I loved Elder Dushku’s inclusion of people who struggle to feel the Spirit at all due to depression, anxiety, and other mental health issues. I believe deeply he didn’t mean to say difficulty feeling the Spirit is a mental health issue, so I won’t hold it against him if other people make that connection. I simply love that he said it so directly. I understand the focus on temples, since it is the top target within the Church – and it is the visible proof that we believe all can become what we say we believe we can become. I am torn greatly only by a few of the requirements to attend (and I do wish some of them were removed), but I understand and respect the concept of a sacred place to experience God and walk a symbolic journey into Their presence. The key to me is what type of people we become as a result of how we view temples – and that varies individually and, often, greatly.
Elder Gerard’s talk is too black and white for me. I am fine with a focus on integrity, but this talk can cause too much guilt or shame for a lot of people who will struggle to accept simple mistakes, past and present. I also disliked greatly his condemnation of posting comments anonymously that are critical in any way of church leaders or doctrines. The reason is obvious, perhaps, but it isn’t personal. I just don’t like telling people they can’t express honest concerns anonymously, since that is critical for a lot of people to have the support they need, including those who want to stay LDS.They are being honest and showing integrity in doing so.
Pres. Eyring looks like his physical health is deteriorating. He spoke fluently and well, but he didn’t look physically well. He looks his age. It would not surprise me if his talk was recorded and not given live. (No criticism at all in saying that.)
Saturday morning, 2nd hour: Elder SoaresDrawing a blank. It was about gaining confidence in Christ and temples… or something. Not sure what the theme was.
Elder GerardA talk about integrity. Not a bad talk, the delivery wasn’t very dynamic. I don’t 100% agree with everything he said about what it means to be integrous but at least it’s a talk on a principle.
Soares followed by Gerard was a one two punch that will put most into a deep coma. Two back to back talks that were kinda boring.
Elder Eyring: In attendance but talk was prerecorded. To me this was another Mormon themed hodgepodge talk similar to Soares’.
Old-Timer wrote:
I also disliked greatly his condemnation of posting comments anonymously that are critical in any way of church leaders or doctrines. The reason is obvious, perhaps, but it isn’t personal. I just don’t like telling people they can’t express honest concerns anonymously, since that is critical for a lot of people to have the support they need, including those who want to stay LDS.They are being honest and showing integrity in doing so.
I took that bit as him conflating displaying loyalty to the church with integrity.
If you genuinely believe the things you’re posting online, you’re being integrous.
And I will say that I was a bit saddened to see Gerard resurrect something Oaks said some time ago. Quote:But our zeal to keep this second commandment must not cause us to forget the first, to love God with all our heart, soul, and mind.
I know I’m reading more into it than what’s said but this has very often been interpreted to mean we should restrict the ways we love our neighbor because it might condone their behavior in such a way that causes us to break the first great commandment.
IMO the two great commandments aren’t at odds with each other and one does not rank above another. They’re one and the same. You can’t obey one without obeying the other.
If we place rules around proper and improper ways to love our neighbor we jeopardize our ability to follow the first great commandment.
This is the way I read the Great Commandments: 1) Love God.
2) Love yourself that same way.
3) Love others that same way.
I believe our view of God influences directly our view of ourselves and others.
I believe the key is viewing God as an eternally caring, loving, patient, charitable being – then taking that approach with ourselves and everyone else. That is the pure Mormon Gospel, I believe, but culture and human nature get in the way too often.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.