- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I agree with Gerald. I know a few people who have had Elder Bednar attend their Stake Conferences, and every one of them said it was a different experience than General Conference. He still didn’t come across as a comedian, but he was “warmer” than he seems in General Conference. I had the exact same experience with Elder Holland at a Stake Conference. He was passionate, as always, but he also was warm, loving, compassionate, hilarious (and I mean really, really, really funny), etc.
Most people lose a bit of themselves when they speak publicly in a “formal” setting where their words are being recorded and broadcast to people they can’t see, even people who do it a lot. The Pres. Uchtdorf’s are the exception – especially in a church that doesn’t try to cultivate charisma as a prime selling point. Frankly, Pres. Uchtdorf only appears “charismatic” in General Conference because he is being compared to colleagues who absolutely are not charismatic in that setting. He is engaging and at ease, but, for example, he would not succeed as a televangelist, since we are taught from Primary age that the message is FAR more important than the delivery. He is FAR more charismatic in person than he is in General Conference.
I hope I can make this comment succinct. To further Gerald and Curtis points, I have a friend whose sister married the son of the secretary to the first Presidency when President Hinckley, Monson and Faust were the presiding three. Because of her sisters connections, my friend had lots of insights and experiences with the top 3 and the 12. 1. Of the 3 from the Presidency – Elder Faust was the most genuinely charitable. Now thats not to say the other 2 weren’t, but Elder Faust remembered names, the last book you were reading, what illness you may have had the last time he saw you, etc. He was a real people person. President Monson, is warm and funny, but he’s also a bit withdrawn and shy. He was the couple’s sealer and was much happier and easy going when it was 30 people in the room, then later in the day when there were 300 people at the reception. At the reception, he kind of stayed in the back in the chair and talked if people came to him. President Hinckley was so busy being busy. He never stopped, he would say HI, shake your hand, and then move on.
As a GC observer, I never would have caught this.
2. Life isn’t peaches and cream in the upper loft. On the day of the sealing, my friends husband ended up in the elevator with President Holland and President Nelson. President Nelson looked exhausted. President Holland said, “Well at least it’s your week off?” President Nelson said, “Yeah but it takes me two to recover and he’s never tired.” My friend asked who they were talking about, he was assuming it was a grandchild or something. Nope. It was President Hinckley. Each week someone new was the traveling companion for President Hinckley, when they returned they were worn out. He grabbed the next guy and wore him out. My friend never would have known it unless he had ridden in the elevator that day, because once the doors opened and they stepped out, it was game on again.
mom3 wrote:I hope I can make this comment succinct. To further Gerald and Curtis points, I have a friend whose sister married the son of the secretary to the first Presidency when President Hinckley, Monson and Faust were the presiding three. Because of her sisters connections, my friend had lots of insights and experiences with the top 3 and the 12.
1. Of the 3 from the Presidency – Elder Faust was the most genuinely charitable. Now thats not to say the other 2 weren’t, but Elder Faust remembered names, the last book you were reading, what illness you may have had the last time he saw you, etc. He was a real people person. President Monson, is warm and funny, but he’s also a bit withdrawn and shy. He was the couple’s sealer and was much happier and easy going when it was 30 people in the room, then later in the day when there were 300 people at the reception. At the reception, he kind of stayed in the back in the chair and talked if people came to him. President Hinckley was so busy being busy. He never stopped, he would say HI, shake your hand, and then move on.
As a GC observer, I never would have caught this.
2. Life isn’t peaches and cream in the upper loft. On the day of the sealing, my friends husband ended up in the elevator with President Holland and President Nelson. President Nelson looked exhausted. President Holland said, “Well at least it’s your week off?” President Nelson said, “Yeah but it takes me two to recover and he’s never tired.” My friend asked who they were talking about, he was assuming it was a grandchild or something. Nope. It was President Hinckley. Each week someone new was the traveling companion for President Hinckley, when they returned they were worn out. He grabbed the next guy and wore him out. My friend never would have known it unless he had ridden in the elevator that day, because once the doors opened and they stepped out, it was game on again.
Maybe we’d love them all the more if they were “game off” more of the time.
Sorry on my phone and in a rush so can’t get as detailed as I would like. My issue with Bednar is not his manner or delivery it it HIS words! Just a short list of recent talks:(summarized sorry)
Quick to Observe: the whole 2 earrings are evil and lds girl deserved to be dumped by the RM because she didn’t follow the prophets counsel quickly and there for was not a worthy eternal companion.
Windows of Heaven and We Believe in Being Chaste: tithing and law of chasity but heleft out key parts of the scripturs he quoted to make his points.
The famous Things as they Realy Are: in which he talks about not doing extreme sports and that technology can be bad (yes we all agree about that) but he went on to say at BYUI that Facebook was evil….I had several roommates and friends that stopped using Facebook because of his devotional about it.
The most frustating and worrisiome for me was the GC talk “Nothing Shall Offend Them” in which I summarize the gest was if somone leaves or has issues with the church it was because they were offended or sinned and should suck it up and come back. ( not his exact words
So again it’s not his delivery it’s his words and beliefs that cause me to worry. Perhaps though in the future he will preach less about outward signs such as stupid earrings.
Dax wrote:Sorry on my phone and in a rush so can’t get as detailed as I would like.
My issue with Bednar is not his manner or delivery it it HIS words! Just a short list of recent talks:(summarized sorry)
Quick to Observe: the whole 2 earrings are evil and lds girl deserved to be dumped by the RM because she didn’t follow the prophets counsel quickly and there for was not a worthy eternal companion.
Windows of Heaven and We Believe in Being Chaste: tithing and law of chasity but heleft out key parts of the scripturs he quoted to make his points.
The famous Things as they Realy Are: in which he talks about not doing extreme sports and that technology can be bad (yes we all agree about that) but he went on to say at BYUI that Facebook was evil….I had several roommates and friends that stopped using Facebook because of his devotional about it.
The most frustating and worrisiome for me was the GC talk “Nothing Shall Offend Them” in which I summarize the gest was if somone leaves or has issues with the church it was because they were offended or sinned and should suck it up and come back. ( not his exact words
So again it’s not his delivery it’s his words and beliefs that cause me to worry. Perhaps though in the future he will preach less about outward signs such as stupid earrings.
Ya Dax, that’s what I was talking about. To keep it neutral though I won’t specify him it other leaders and just say black and white thinkers. It isn’t the the delivery in which a person talks so much as a a predicative black and white word choice.
That’s a personality trait though. It’s a fear based one based on seeing the world through fear.
As a result they see the world as a predominate threat and a need for absolute certainty where there is security for them and other black and white thinkers. That’s the audience they are writing for– those that see the world as a threat and need security in absolute answers. You or I or others in a middle ground are not his target audience.
For the record I have recently been shown many talks of his because we have a priesthood nearly fanboy of his. So I have seen a ton if his none GC talks lately. He is the same way.
Could care less about the business like delivery of anyone.
That is something indifferent.
But black and white thinking and constant extreme word choices is scary.
In his non GC talks I saw his word choices were even more extreme.
hawkgrrrl wrote:I’m not sure why Holland gets so much the love. There is a thinly veiled anger to him that really is quite off-putting IMO.
I also think the anger is increasingly apparent. When apostles are newly called, they seem so humbled by the office and their talks are powerful. Several have come across as increasingly hard line (Bednar, Anderson, Christofferson) while Elder Holland has become increasingly indignant and defensive. I wonder if the stress of the position is just too much for some, especially in an age where their words are dissected online, debated, and ridiculed and their images are returned to them as memes which are less than flattering. Oh, and these are around for their children and grandchildren to see.
Just google Boyd K. Packer…
I know for me, it would be very easy to become angry and defensive. Heck, I succumb to that in my state of relative anonymity when I feel like I’m being ‘attacked’. Retreating and retrenching is such a normal (but tragic) human response that I feel sorry for anyone who feels so besieged as resort to it.
I’m just catching up on this thread (so I hope this isn’t repetitious) but wanted to add that the stories I’ve heard from people who know Elder Packer are that he is a teddy bear in real life – very approachable and kind – just like a grandpa. The other stories are that Pres. Monson is extremely exacting, somewhat temperamental, and difficult to work for (even before the rumors of Alzheimer’s). I post this only to suggest that an individual’s public persona may not be an accurate assessment of his/her heart.
I agree FC, I base my feelings about a GA on what they say, not how they say it. We have a stake conference coming up, and a member of the Seventy is going to be there. A member of the SP went out of his way to invite me via email. I politely declined and shared with him a comparison of the types of things Pres. Uchtdorf says as compared to the types of things this particular GA, who is very black and white, says. That said, there are a few of the Q15 I would really worry about having the pulpit more often as members of the FP, and there are other GAs who I would rather not see getting the pulpit every GC as apostles. On a side note, ETB was mentioned earlier. He was not especially political (although he did push the constitution as being inspired), but he was also very black and white. There were some things he said that really ruffled some feathers. I was glad his time as president was relatively short.
I was pleasantly surprised to find out BKP is a painter. Okay, not a great one, but a painter nonetheless. I don’t like many of his sentiments, but this at least gives me something I can relate to him on.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.