- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Cwald…I agree. As I was listening to Boyd K. Packer’s talk, my heart fell… several times. I felt so sick and sad inside. I couldn’t help but think, “Here we go again.” Since Proposition 8, I have slowly healed, feeling that I could go on as a member of this Church, believing with all my heart that Jesus is the Christ, but perhaps not believing everything the Church has to offer — especially when it comes to same-sex-attraction, same-sex-marriage, or homosexuality. This morning I was told yet again to question my thinking, because I don’t agree with their thinking. As a result, my thinking is wrong, but I don’t think I’m wrong. I love my son with all my heart. I have been crying on and off since about 10:30 this morning. My son is coming over this evening with his partner. I’m just going to have to pull myself together.
I’m so discouraged.
Wow! I need to listen to Boyd K Packers talk again – but all I can say is WOW! He really hit hard saying “We cannot change, We will not change…” I don’t want to misquote the talk or take it out of context. Perhaps I am concentrating on the negative here but that talk did seem very harsh and I was unsure as to how so many hurting and vulnerable LDS people out there are going to take it.
President Packer’s talk was not in line with the actual published stance of the Church itself. That, in and of itself, is enough for me to take it with a huge grain of salt – even if that exacerbates my gout. 
A friend of my son who is not LDS was with us watching conference. Her response was concise and really interesting, I thought. It was, essentially:
Quote:He has a really good understanding of general moral principles, and I really respect the basis of the points he made – but it’s obvious he doesn’t understand homosexuality. He’s a very old man, and I can’t expect him to get it.
I can live with that, and I appreciated it.
Ophelia .. If it makes you feel any better .. I think the talk was an uninspired personal belief. Ignore it. I consider myself a Christ-like .. intelligent woman. So I stand for something. 
Quote:I try to look at the talks that irritate me as a good form of diversity. Some talk are boring. Some talks upset me. And some talk are truly inspiring.
But this is my personal reaction to them.
Others sitting next to me are being inspired by ideas of the Church never changing, being absolutely true in all regards, and leaders being an unfailing source of guidance to depend on in all regards. While those ideas don’t really resonate with me, they bring a lot of comfort to other people who are experience their religion in a much different (but more common it seems) perspective.
Easier said than done, but I make a conscious effort to try and see it in a broader perspective like that.
Ok, that sounds good and in line with your ministry here.
Brian Johnston wrote:In fact, I specifically posted a new thread over there about conference that I did not post here (Pres. Monson’s PH session talk). I didn’t think it was appropriate for this community, but fit better at NOM.
I see and an interesting observation on God’s prophet, seer, and revelator over at NOM. So what is appropriate for us here?
GBSmith wrote:I see and an interesting observation on God’s prophet, seer, and revelator over at NOM. So what is appropriate for us here?
Maybe I should reword and say I thought it was borderline for me. I really just wanted to complain a little bit about Pres. Monson’s style, and the content of his sermon. I was curious also to see what people at NOM thought about it.
I guess it might be an OK topic for our community here, but we have the overall goal of steering topics towards solutions and reconciliation strategies here. NOM has a more free format.
gorillathunder wrote:He really hit hard saying “We cannot change, We will not change…” I don’t want to misquote the talk or take it out of context.
I know this is upsetting to a lot of people on the fringes, like us. But he is 1 voice among many. I am sure he believes that … but I am not sure why. He knows better. The LDS Church
HASchanged, many many times. Not only that, Brother Packer was there to help usher in the “Correlation” program in the church, a MAJOR change in direction and style that started in the late 1940’s and early 50’s. I hear him reference memories of this often in his talks. Few members pick up on it I think. He was also an apostle when it came time to open up priesthood to “all worthy males.” He’s been there for many many changes. But he tends to be one of the most conservative voices in the Q15.
My wife pointed out that at some point in the future we’ll look back on the church’s statements about gays and lesbians with the same abhorrence we do about the church’s past statements about blacks, for instance. I think she’s right. It’s just a matter of time, though that is little consolation, I suppose. I think some of you need to learn the benefits of falling asleep during general conference. It does wonders for my nerves.
Seriously, though, I can see why people are upset. But why, if you feel so strongly that certain things that were said are wrong, should you pay them any heed? Just because they were said today doesn’t make them any less wrong than if they were said 100 years ago. Those people are all on their own journeys just like we are.
flowerdrops wrote:Tom Haws wrote:cwald wrote:those who reject the need for organized religion, reject the work of the master
😮 Yikes! He said that? Sigh. The Master? Is he talking about that same guy who traipsed all over Galillee giving healings and wisdom teachings for 3 years without an org chart, a corporation, or even a building?The current organization is much like that fancy multimillion dollar space pen. Christ would have preferred a pencil.
That space pen story is sooo oold!
http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp It’s a good story though, but I thought Uchtdorf’s flight metaphors were interesting. Never knew he’d worked for Lufthansa…
I do find these two hour sessions physically uncomfortable though – and no audio-visual element. We’re just watching someone speak, which is disappointing given what technology can do these days. If they can broadcast it globally and translate it, then they can spice it up in other ways too. Otherwise it’s just a marathon – I don’t know if I can do this forever, SC + GC makes for a lot of sitting around, with sermons which are of varying quality. In last stake conference, it was only the last talk which blew me away. I’m maybe slightly unfair on the visual element – stills are used occasionally in talks.
I watched the last session as well…
Per Malm’s talk was quite good, using a metaphor of a tree. He mentioned a tree he knew which looked beautiful, but then when you got close to it, you saw it was hollow and full of all kinds of trash. It was held together with a metal band, and anchored by wires. Eventually someone put firecrackers in it, and that was the end of it. I thought it was a good metaphor for personal corruption, which was put over in a non-blood and thunder manner.
Another guy from the Seventy seemed to cry through his entire sermon. But it had some good points too.
I find Boyd K. Packer’s talks very difficult to deal with. I think he is one of the last of the Old Guard. I really think he wishes that he could have become prophet, but that’s unlikely now. He’s had a major influence over church policy/viewpoints though, probably more than most others who never got to the top position, and I think Bruce McConkie was that way as well.
One thing I’ve never understood – why all the initials? With Joseph F. Smith and so on, it’s obvious, but how many other Gordon Hinckleys, Thomas Monsons etc have there been? Not many I can think of. There’s only one Boyd Packer, and Dieter Uchtdorf that I’ve ever heard of, and the same goes for Dallin Oaks, Jeffrey Holland, Todd Christofferson etc
Old-Timer wrote:President Packer’s talk was not in line with the actual published stance of the Church itself.
Is that what you are going to say next week when someone in Elder’s/HP Quorum starts quoting from it?
Seriously. We can make all the excuses and apologies we want here – but that doesn’t change the fact that the church just took a huge step backwards. And I actually like what is being said on this board. I think Brain said something like, “If you don’t think it is right,you don’t have to believe it.” That’s true, I don’t. All this is just fine and dandy, but l hope we don’t decide just to beat around the bush and start talking and apoligizing for happened within our organization this weekend, and saying that what was said actually wasn’t said or wasn’t meant to say. You and I, and EVERY other LDS member is going to have to live with the consequences EVERY Sunday for at LEAST the next six months. And don’t forget folks, Pres. Monson came out said as clearly as you can say — “there is no middle way.”
Anybody want to apologize for that one? What gets said from the podium at GC affects millions of people. What was said, IMO, was wrong. It will affect you and me, and it will make our membership all the more harder to endure — because I am NOT ALLOWED TO SAY THAT!
cwald wrote:Pres. Monson came out said as clearly as you can say — “there is no middle way.”
Actually, he said there’s no middle ‘ground’. Maybe there’s no difference, but I see a different shade of meaning.
OTOH, he
didsay it doesn’t matter what color shirt you wear … or something to that effect. OTOH, he
didsay it doesn’t matter what color shirt you wear … or something to that effect. Ha!
Doug said, “I think some of you need to learn the benefits of falling asleep during general conference. It does wonders for my nerves.”
I said to my husband, “why can’t I just go back to being a TBM and sleep through the conference!!!” LOL I laughed when I read what Doug said. But seriously, I use to fall asleep not worrying about what was said, not parsing every word wondering whether I believe it or agree with it. Sometimes that life seems so much easier and yet…..
I also agree with cwald that these talks will have a great impact in our culture and the fall out will not be pretty. Even my husband who likes to give the apostles the benefit of the doubt, is greatly concerned over the consequences of Elder Packers talk in regards to mental health and addiction. All the work my dh does to help those with addictions heal and now an apostle has said that the priesthood can cure you. (if you have enough faith and are worthy enough of course) Weren’t we just getting over telling those with depression that they could pray themselves out of it. And that isn’t even considering all the gay lds young men and women who will be closer to contemplating suicide because they can’t seem to muster the faith they need to change their orientation.
My heart is hurting.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.