Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Standing before an Apostle does, at a meeting


Duncan

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Me thinks you don't understand the law of common consent, ...

I understand it quite well. I have my doubts about you.

Quote

or the law of not speaking evil of others ...

As in your telling ksfisher he's misled and fallen short of the gospel because he disagrees with your politics?

 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, JulieM said:

No, members thrill and get so excited when President Monson takes the stand to speak.  Same with any prophet.  We hang on every word and look forward to hearing anything from him.

It's not even close to reading a page on the Internet from the church news room or a document for legal use.  I have a family never who is gay.  It would mean everything to hear some loving words from my prophet and hear him speak on this.  I do wonder why he hasn't?  Maybe it's not as important to him as it is to others in the 12 who are more vocal, do you think?

Please read the letters sent by the First Presidency to local leaders with instructions to read them to all members. There is nothing more official or authoritative than this short of canonization. It's not often the First Presidency resorts to this to communicate something that is important to them. I heard them read in the chapel they had the same impact as if they had been read at Conference. They include these words:

Quote

The gospel of Jesus Christ teaches us to love and treat all people with kindness and civility—even when we disagree. We affirm that those who avail themselves of laws or court rulings authorizing same‐sex marriage should not be treated disrespectfully. Indeed, the Church has advocated for rights of same‐sex couples in matters of hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment, and probate, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family or the constitutional rights of church members....

As members of the Church, we are responsible to teach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to illuminate the great blessings that flow from heeding God’s commandments as well as the inevitable consequences of ignoring them. We invite you to pray that people everywhere will have their hearts softened to the truths of the gospel, and that wisdom will be granted to those who are called upon to decide issues critical to society’s future.

 

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, california boy said:

Ok public doctrine of marriage between a man and a woman.  I don't think anyone would dispute that is current Mormon doctrine.  But where did it come from?  Has president Monson declared that he got that doctrine from a revelation from God?  

His source is made plain here.....

Quote

As we face this and other issues of our time, we encourage all to bear in mind our Heavenly Father’s purposes in creating the earth and providing for our mortal birth and experience here as His children. “God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth” (Genesis 1:27–28). “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). Marriage between a man and a woman was instituted by God and is central to His plan for His children and for the well-being of society. 

 

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Wow....ok.

Seriously time for you to move on, Bernard....

Indeed. Your demands have been met and more.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

Sure, but not the point.

In 1949 the First Presidency issued a definitive official statement on behalf of the Church that the negro ban started in premortality.
The Church today disavows that statement.

Apparently, a united official statement is just as apt to be wrong and any other.

Perhaps we see through a glass darkly. In the end, what was prophesied came to pass and we witnessed it. Thanks be to God.

Edited by Bernard Gui
Link to comment
38 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Please read the letters sent by the First Presidency to local leaders with instructions to read them to all members. There is nothing more official or authoritative than this short of canonization. It's not often the First Presidency resorts to this to communicate something that is important to them. I heard them read in the chapel they had the same impact as if they had been read at Conference.

I guess for you, but not the same, for me and others I'd bet.  I feel that it's not even close to being the same as actually hearing from the prophet.  Hearing him speak on this would mean a great deal to many, many members who hurt over this.  We don't even know who wrote any of the letters or press releases.  We want to hear his feelings, his emotions and not just read it or have it read to us a piece of paper that he signed. There is no comparison.  I think most members agree.

What it makes us feel is that it's not that important of an issue for him.  Others have spoken on it and maybe they wrote the letters or press releases?  Doesn't he choose what he speaks on to the members?  He has chosen other topics which makes me believe this wasn't pressing on his mind.

Edited by JulieM
Link to comment
11 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Indeed. Your demands have been met and more.

No, not at all.  What I asked for does not exist.  But thanks for trying (I mean that).  We have no quotes from public addresses given by President Monson to the members on the topic of same-sex marriage. Those are what I asked for.  You can quote general letters (who know who wrote them?), press releases, and public documents written by lawyers.  If those satisfy you, I am certainly fine with that.  But again, that's not what I asked for, so you have not met my "demands" :).

The quotes do not exist and I do have to ask why President Monson has not personally spoken to the members about this if it is so important?  

Edited by ALarson
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I guess for you, but not the same, for me and others I'd bet.  I feel that it's not even close to being the same as actually hearing from the prophet.  Hearing him speak on this would mean a great deal to many, many members who hurt over this.  We don't even know who wrote any of the letter or press releases.  We want to hear his feelings, his emotions and not just read it have read to us a piece of paper that he signed.  There is no comparison.  I think most members agree.

What it makes us feel is that it's not that important of an issue for him.  Others have spoken on it and maybe they wrote the letters or press releases?  Doesn't he choose what he speaks on to the members?  He has chosen other topics which makes me believe this wasn't pressing on his mind.

You seem to be saying that you'll believe the words of the prophet as long as they are delivered the way that you want to hear them.  Many have fallen into the trap before of not believing prophet because he didn't look or sound like they were expecting.

Link to comment
36 minutes ago, JulieM said:

No, members thrill and get so excited when President Monson takes the stand to speak.  Same with any prophet.  We hang on every word and look forward to hearing anything from him.

It's not even close to reading a page on the Internet from the church news room or a document for legal use.  I have a family never who is gay.  It would mean everything to hear some loving words from my prophet and hear him speak on this.  I do wonder why he hasn't?  Maybe it's not as important to him as it is to others in the 12 who are more vocal, do you think?

I don't know, but you may be onto something.  I know it was a topic that was of some importance to Packer (gays).  So he chose to address it at times when he spoke to the members.  I'd have to look up all those who have addressed the gay members of the church or the topic of gay marriage.  I do believe they pick their own topics.  Of course, the Prophet does and could have spoken on it if he'd desired to.  

Good questions, Julie!

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I guess for you, but not the same, for me and others I'd bet.  I feel that it's not even close to being the same as actually hearing from the prophet.  Hearing him speak on this would mean a great deal to many, many members who hurt over this.  We don't even know who wrote any of the letter or press releases.  We want to hear his feelings, his emotions and not just read it have read to us a piece of paper that he signed.  There is no comparison.  I think most members agree.

What it makes us feel is that it's not that important of an issue for him.  Others have spoken on it and maybe they wrote the letters or press releases?  Doesn't he choose what he speaks on to the members?  He has chosen other topics which makes me believe this wasn't pressing on his mind.

When the bishop says, "Brothers and Sisters, I have received an important letter from the First Presidency which they have asked me to read to you in this meeting we have called for the purpose of discussing a very important topic," I sit up and pay close attention. When he does it twice plus a letter to specific congregations (how many other such letters have you heard repeating the same thing?) this is clearly proof that it is important to him and pressing on his mind. You will notice his instructions were that the letters be read in appropriate situations which included the exclusion of children under 12. Can't do that in Conference.  We do know that the three letters to leaders were written on First Presidency letterhead and were signed by the First Presidency, and we know their provenance is unquestionable. It's not necessary to quibble over whether or not he actually wrote every word with his own hand. 

Edited by Bernard Gui
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, ALarson said:

No, not at all.  What I asked for does not exist.  But thanks for trying (I mean that).  We have no quotes from public addresses given by President Monson to the members on the topic of same-sex marriage. Those are what I asked for.  You can quote general letters (who know who wrote them?), press releases, and public documents written by lawyers.  If those satisfy you, I am certainly fine with that.

But you have absolutely not presented what I asked for.  The quotes do not exist and I do have to ask why President Monson has not personally spoken about this if it is so important?  

You shifted the goal posts. Not nice. 

Please don't quibble over who wrote a letter on First Presidency letterhead and sent it out to all Church leaders with instructions to read it, authorized and informed under their signatures. That boat don't float.

And we disagree  about what it means to speak personally. When I read Nephi's words, or hear Joseph Smith's story, hear the Sermon on the Mount, or read the Savior's words to the Nephites and Lamanites after his resurrection, I feel they are speaking personally to me. I don't have to see a video. 

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Interesting how this thread has evolved from showing respect by allowing GAs to stand before everyone else to whether LDS prophets are infallible...this board is schizophrenic 

Early on it became a thread to bash Elder Bednar. Schizophrenic indeed.

Link to comment
20 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

You seem to be saying that you'll believe the words of the prophet as long as they are delivered the way that you want to hear them.  Many have fallen into the trap before of not believing prophet because he didn't look or sound like they were expecting.

This has nothing to do with looks or sounds.  President Monson has had so many times to speak to us.  He chooses what he speaks on.  He hasn't spoken to us about SSM.  I think that tells the members something.  Hearing him speak is so different than a press release.  

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

You shifted the goal posts.

No, you must have either not understood what I stated from the beginning or you chose to ignore what I was asking for.  No goal post shifting.

From the beginning here I asked if President Monson has spoken personally and publicly to the members in any speeches he has given and then I asked for quotes if any knew of them.

That you couldn't supply them, is fine and we hopefully agree they do not exist.  But no shifting going on at all.  

Bernard, if you have nothing else to add to this back and forth, I'm done and respect how you feel.

Edited by ALarson
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, JulieM said:

This has nothing to do with looks or sounds.  President Monson has had so many times to speak to us.  He chooses what he speaks on.  He hasn't spoken to us about SSM.  I think that tells the members something.  Hearing him speak is so different than a press release.  

I do agree.  Others seem to feel differently.  What we have established is a talk to the members from him on this topic does not exist (unless there is one still out there that hasn't been posted).

The question as to why he chose not to address it is a good one though.  

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I do agree.  Others seem to feel differently.  What we have established is a talk to the members from him on this topic does not exist (unless there is one still out there that hasn't been posted).

The question as to why he chose not to address it is a good one though.  

Well it feels like the brethren speak on topics they are inspired to talk to members about or topics they believe members need to hear.  Since President Monson has not ever spoken about SSM or gay issues, maybe that tells us he doesn't want to or feels it's not that important or wasn't inspired to speak on it.  Maybe others in the twelve feel more strongly about it and wanted the policy enforced.  I doubt though the prophet would go along with it if he strongly disagreed but it might not have been as pressing for him as for others.  Who knows what went on with it behind the scenes.

Edited by JulieM
Link to comment
58 minutes ago, JulieM said:

This has nothing to do with looks or sounds.  President Monson has had so many times to speak to us.  He chooses what he speaks on.  He hasn't spoken to us about SSM.  I think that tells the members something.  Hearing him speak is so different than a press release.  

We are not talking about press releases. We are talking about letters he sent to bishops three times with instructions to read them and discuss them in meetings with members. In our ward these were intense and intimate meetings. The letters were also released by the Church to the public. Knowing this and reading the letters, do you still believe it is not important to him?

Edited by Bernard Gui
Link to comment
51 minutes ago, ALarson said:

No, you must have either not understood what I stated from the beginning or you chose to ignore what I was asking for.  No goal post shifting.

From the beginning here I asked if President Monson has spoken personally and publicly to the members in any speeches he has given and then I asked for quotes if any knew of them.

That you couldn't supply them, is fine and we hopefully agree they do not exist.  But no shifting going on at all.  

Bernard, if you have nothing else to add to this back and forth, I'm done and respect how you feel.

I quoted your posts in their entirety and answered as per your requests. Thanks for participating. 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, california boy said:

I believe Elder Christofferson referred to the change as a policy change, not a revelation from God.  You can correct me if I am wrong on that.

The two ("policy" and "revelation") are not necessarily mutually exclusive.  See, e.g., Elder Nelson's remarks in January 2016.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

We are not talking about press releases. We are talking about letters he sent to bishops three times with instructions to read them and discuss them in meetings with members. In our ward these were intense and intimate meetings. The letters were also released by the Church to the public. Knowing this and reading the letters, do you still believe it is not important to him?

I don't know to be honest.  He's the prophet and speaks to the members the messages from God.  If you had a message for your children and had them wanting to hear you personally speak to them, would you let the newsroom do that for you or would you lovingly speak directly to them person to person?

He has had many chances to do that and hasn't so far.  A child would feel that the parent didn't want to talk about it after that.  Those are feelings I have here as I've longed to hear from him about this.  Some others are ok with other types of communication I guess, but he could have spoken to us.  He had many opportunities when we were there and intently listening.

Edited by JulieM
Link to comment
53 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

I quoted your posts in their entirety and answered as per your requests.

Ok, I didn't see that.  Can you link to where you wrote any quotes by president Monson from a public talk he gave on SSM to the members at General conference or at another church gathering?  When was this?

(Or just post a link to his talk if that is easier and I can read it myself.  Thanks Bernard Gui.  I can tell you care and want to help.). I'm going to go back into the thread too.

Edited by JulieM
Link to comment
4 hours ago, ALarson said:

You are hilarious, Scott...so dramatic.  You do know that members of the church do not have to agree with every policy and everything their leaders state, don't you?   

Well, since the Stake President is in full agreement, I doubt that will happen anytime soon.   I think there are many in leadership positions who question this new policy, Scott.   Few will seek out couples in a SSM to excommunicate them (I hope none will, but it may have happened).  If a couple is minding their own business and not speaking out against the church, why seek them out for church discipline?

What one <has> to do and what is <wise> to do might not be identical. 

But I do believe people in leadership positions over local units (stakes and wards, districts and branches) are obliged to be in harmony with the general leadership of the Church, especially on matters on which the Church's position has been clearly, repeatedly and unitedly articulated. If not, the trumpet is giving an uncertain sound. I for one would find it very difficult to follow such local leadership with confidence if I knew they were privately or publicly undercutting the teachings of the prophets and apostles. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...