- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I agree Nibbler. On a couple occasions he could have just left it at choose to believe and had just an effective (or perhaps even more effective) message. But again, overall a very good message centered on core principles of the gospel. His talk is a standard marriage talk which I could take or leave, but I just hope that if I make it to be his age I can be as robust and lucid as Elder Perry is. It’s hard to believe he’s the oldest of the bunch. I saw the Packer talk. I couldn’t understand much of what he said. I think part of it is his weight — he’s really “Packed” it on and it affects his abilty to enunciate his speech. The parts I could hear were definitely traditional Mormon stuff we expect to hear from Boyd K. Packer. I also saw the talk about relationships between men and women. My wife gave a summary of some of it — to me, it was another talk that entrenches the traditional roles of men and women while also claiming simultaneous equality, which never worked for me.
DarkJedi wrote:At first blush I’d say most here will want to skip Sr. Burton as well. I left when she talked about being aware there are those who can’t meet the ideal but she wasn’t going to talk about that and instead talked about her ideal – the worthy husband who provides his family and all the other stuff from the Proclamation.
I’m a softie when a story strikes me a certain way. The image of the father putting up a flimsy string fence for his kids was touching to me. He did what he could with what he had to teach and protect his kids.I agree, Ann – and I love that the fence was string. I think that is great representation of teaching correct principles in a way that honors agency. I have a bunch of things that need to get done this afternoon, so I won’t be able to watch the third session. I will watch the talks this evening and add my thoughts at that time. Old-Timer wrote:… the
thirdsession. :clap: I love E. Oaks’ talk which addressed the dangers of the prosperity gospel and setting our hearts on riches and even security. Great message. I nearly did a spit take when E. Perry quoted Iran quoting us. Well, now we know who loves the Proc.
This is the quote that rose from the Saturday morning session. There’s a nice image in my FB feed (the capitalization is theirs, not mine): Quote:I am convinced that a HUSBAND is never more attractive TO HIS WIFE than when he is serving in his God-given roles as a worthy priesthood holder.
IMO that was one of the more offending things that was said during the Saturday morning session.
Woman praying in GC!!!!!
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :clap: :clap: :clap: Audible “Nos” on the opposing votes. DFU noted the dissenting votes.
The sustaining of the officers is interesting. There are several people who are routinely shouting “opposed” when Ucthdor asks for dissenting opinion. The people sitting next to me are visibly disturbed by this. West wrote:The sustaining of the officers is interesting. There are several people who are routinely shouting “opposed” when Ucthdor asks for dissenting opinion. The people sitting next to me are visibly disturbed by this.
If they’d been hanging around the bloggernacle they would have known it was coming, like Pres. Uchtdorf apparently did (notice he didn’t even look up from his script). Interesting difference in approach to the last time this happened (in the 80s?).West wrote:The people sitting next to me are visibly disturbed by this.
I imagine.
DarkJedi wrote:If they’d been hanging around the bloggernacle they would have known it was coming, like Pres. Uchtdorf apparently did (notice he didn’t even look up from his script). Interesting difference in approach to the last time this happened (in the 80s?).
Don’t know if it has happened since but it did happen in 1980:
http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1980/10/the-sustaining-of-church-officers?lang=eng ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.lds.org/general-conference/1980/10/the-sustaining-of-church-officers?lang=eng The key difference being that the opposing voters were directed to talk to their SP. People might read something into that but the church is a lot bigger now that it was in 1980.
nibbler wrote:West wrote:The people sitting next to me are visibly disturbed by this.
I imagine.
I’m sitting in the high balconey, and I could see everyone around me sort of looking around in panic and surprise. There was a lot of muttering. One of the shouters was up in our area. Definitely took most people here by surprise, but the people on the stand seemed more curious than surprised when looking around for the scattered shouters.
My family has chosen the fun session to attend apparently.
True Nibbler, it is bigger. Yet in both cases the negative voters were there, but back then they actually got to talk to a GA if they chose. That could still happen were one willing as was Elder Hinckley. I don’t want to go too far with this, but I actually think today’s approach was a little insulting and arrogant.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.