Regional Priesthood Leadership Conference

[blueglass]

3 hours ago, rongo said:

Attached are my notes from a recent local conference. In attendance were 2 general authorities, 2 temple presidents, a mission president, an area authority, and local stake presidencies, bishops, elders quorum presidents, and ward mission leaders. I tried pasting it, but you know how this site is sometimes . . . it won't let me paste the text. So, Word doc. it is.

It really was a good conference. I wish these things happened more often.

Enjoy!

Regional Priesthood Leadership Conference.docx

please send more context on how the seer stone and hat translation things came up?  Why did he get into this?   Most people I have spoken to about the seer stones are really bothered by it and don't want to hear a story which conflicts with the standard script.  I don't see how the missionary manual "preach my gospel" could be changed to teach the truth as most people would shove the missionaries out the door.  

[blueglass]

3 hours ago, rongo said:

Attached are my notes from a recent local conference. In attendance were 2 general authorities, 2 temple presidents, a mission president, an area authority, and local stake presidencies, bishops, elders quorum presidents, and ward mission leaders. I tried pasting it, but you know how this site is sometimes . . . it won't let me paste the text. So, Word doc. it is.

It really was a good conference. I wish these things happened more often.

Enjoy!

Regional Priesthood Leadership Conference.docx

the doubts response was revealing.  A seventy acknowledging that his own daughter in her 40's had a faith crisis after hearing things she hadn't heard before that threw her for a loop?  Then he scolds the bishop for admitting he has had doubts too?  His daughter then scolds the bishop from the perspective that bishops with doubts are losers.   The seventy then doesn't walk through the "things [his daughter] hadn't heard before" he just says the key is just remember that as a primary child you had a powerful spiritual witness.  More detail please!  How to help not harm?    

[Scott Lloyd]

10 minutes ago, blueglass said:

please send more context on how the seer stone and hat translation things came up?  Why did he get into this?   Most people I have spoken to about the seer stones are really bothered by it and don't want to hear a story which conflicts with the standard script.  I don't see how the missionary manual "preach my gospel" could be changed to teach the truth as most people would shove the missionaries out the door.  

And you don't think the description of the Urim and Thummim (two stones set into a bow mounted on a breastplate) is weird enough to make them do that already if they are so disposed?

 

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And you don't think the description of the Urim and Thummim (two stones set into a bow mounted on a breastplate) is weird enough to make them do that already if they are so disposed?

 

I think it is easier to believe something ornate and ancient looking is spiritually powerful than a stone you might find in your backyard.

Edited September 20, 2017 by Calm

[Scott Lloyd]

Love this portion:

Quote

Marriage is under attack. Let me be very, very clear. The Church is not in any way anti-gay. The Church is very clearly pro-traditional marriage. This will never change. We are losing and maybe have already lost the concept of the word family in society, as it is being diluted down to fit other definitions. In everything, teach the ideal of the traditional family. Some can’t or won’t have a traditional family --- we understand that --- but we shouldn’t water down doctrine so that people in non-traditional family situations don’t feel bad.

Note the part I put in bold.

I keep reading predictions on here that the Church will eventually abandon its adherence to the traditional family ideal (specifically embracing same-sex "marriage"). The last one I saw was that it would happen about eight years from now. But I certainly see no sign of it happening yet!

 

[Danzo]

57 minutes ago, bluebell said:

We have ward council every other week and the are usually around 75 minutes long, most of it taken up by the missionaries. I don’t know how it would be possible to keep it to 20 minutes!

Sometimes its easy to turn ward council into a missionary correlation meeting.  I'm the ward mission leader right now and I have encouraged the missionaries to keep it short and save the discussions for the missionary correlation meeting.

[hope_for_things]

8 minutes ago, blueglass said:

the doubts response was revealing.  A seventy acknowledging that his own daughter in her 40's had a faith crisis after hearing things she hadn't heard before that threw her for a loop?  Then he scolds the bishop for admitting he has had doubts too?  His daughter then scolds the bishop from the perspective that bishops with doubts are losers.   The seventy then doesn't walk through the "things [his daughter] hadn't heard before" he just says the key is just remember that as a primary child you had a powerful spiritual witness.  More detail please!  How to help not harm?    

Quote

10) What can we do to help people with doubts?

Elder 2: My daughter, in her late 40s, just went through a faith crisis. A friend shared things she hadn’t heard, and it threw her for a loop. She went to her bishop for help, and he told her, “Well, work at it. I’ve had my doubts, too.” That is *not* what she needed to hear, and it didn’t help. She came to me, her dad, a member of the Seventy. I asked her, “Do you trust me?” She said that she does, but she has these doubts. I talked with her about the questions and issues she had, and I testified with a prayer in my heart. Her friend has now lost her membership, and she is doing better. Do you know what the lynchpin was? God answered her in the primary program. She had a powerful spiritual witness while the children were singing. For that time, I, her father, became her sure foundation. Her bishop gave a shaky response. Do your best to help and not harm with the counsel we give.

Thanks for calling this to our attention, a very sad response.  I would say the Seventy's approach is actually counter to what I would recommend doing and the council from Elder Ballard when he said that gone are the days when you can bear a testimony and dismiss the questions.  It sounds to me like that's what this Seventy is trying to do, and I would say that this doesn't work.  I would even venture to say that this "sure foundation" in her father is likely not going to last or might even be a facade because the daughter is too scared to share her true feelings with Dad because of his dogmatic approach to doubt and faith questions.  

This just reinforces the evidence that I've seen that many church leaders have no clue how to handle or help people who go through a crisis of faith.  Very disappointing... 

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Sometimes its easy to turn ward council into a missionary correlation meeting.  I'm the ward mission leader right now and I have encouraged the missionaries to keep it short and save the discussions for the missionary correlation meeting.

It doesn't really bother me, but it does make me wonder, what's the point of having missionary correlation meeting and why am i expected to go to it as well as ward council, when we are covering everything in the one meeting?  

[hope_for_things]

7 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Love this portion:

Note the part I put in bold.

I keep reading predictions on here that the Church will eventually abandon its adherence to the traditional family ideal (specifically embracing same-sex "marriage"). The last one I saw was that it would happen about eight years from now. But I certainly see no sign of it happening yet!

 

Pick a doctrine, and I would put money on any doctrine you pick that in 100 years from now it will have changed substantively.  Doctrines evolve, get discarded, are deemphasized, new ideas emerge.  Change will happen whether you want it to or not, and history our guide that this is true.  Feeling that something will "never change" is delusional thinking.  

[rongo]

Just now, bluebell said:

It doesn't really bother me, but it does make me wonder, what's the point of having missionary correlation meeting and why am i expected to go to it as well as ward council, when we are covering everything in the one meeting?  

That's how I've always seen it. And that's the counsel: reduce, and simplify. Don't hold extraneous meetings when you can do what needs to be done in one.

[blueglass]

8 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Love this portion:

Note the part I put in bold.

I keep reading predictions on here that the Church will eventually abandon its adherence to the traditional family ideal (specifically embracing same-sex "marriage"). The last one I saw was that it would happen about eight years from now. But I certainly see no sign of it happening yet!

 

Yes I suppose with Joseph Smith we have an excellent foundation from which to preach to the world on traditional family ideals.  Hope you enjoyed the Love Loud festival - and don't worry it wasn't a "sign".  

[bluebell]

3 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks for calling this to our attention, a very sad response.  I would say the Seventy's approach is actually counter to what I would recommend doing and the council from Elder Ballard when he said that gone are the days when you can bear a testimony and dismiss the questions.  It sounds to me like that's what this Seventy is trying to do, and I would say that this doesn't work.  I would even venture to say that this "sure foundation" in her father is likely not going to last or might even be a facade because the daughter is too scared to share her true feelings with Dad because of his dogmatic approach to doubt and faith questions.  

This just reinforces the evidence that I've seen that many church leaders have no clue how to handle or help people who go through a crisis of faith.  Very disappointing... 

I would agree that such a sure foundation is not guaranteed to last, but let's not pretend like we know anything about this woman or her relationship with her father.  I don't see any reason to even put it out there that she might not have been being honest with him.

[ALarson]

10 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks for calling this to our attention, a very sad response.  I would say the Seventy's approach is actually counter to what I would recommend doing and the council from Elder Ballard when he said that gone are the days when you can bear a testimony and dismiss the questions.  It sounds to me like that's what this Seventy is trying to do, and I would say that this doesn't work.  I would even venture to say that this "sure foundation" in her father is likely not going to last or might even be a facade because the daughter is too scared to share her true feelings with Dad because of his dogmatic approach to doubt and faith questions.  

This just reinforces the evidence that I've seen that many church leaders have no clue how to handle or help people who go through a crisis of faith.  Very disappointing... 

Yes, that was very disappointing for me to read.  IMO, it's horrible advice for how to deal with anyone experiencing doubts or having questions.  

[ALarson]

4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I would agree that such a sure foundation is not guaranteed to last, but let's not pretend like we know anything about this woman or her relationship with her father.  I don't see any reason to even put it out there that she might not have been being honest with him.

That's true too.  On the information given, it doesn't look positive but there may be much more to the story.

[ksfisher]

3 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks for calling this to our attention, a very sad response.  I would say the Seventy's approach is actually counter to what I would recommend doing and the council from Elder Ballard when he said that gone are the days when you can bear a testimony and dismiss the questions.  It sounds to me like that's what this Seventy is trying to do, and I would say that this doesn't work.  I would even venture to say that this "sure foundation" in her father is likely not going to last or might even be a facade because the daughter is too scared to share her true feelings with Dad because of his dogmatic approach to doubt and faith questions.  

This just reinforces the evidence that I've seen that many church leaders have no clue how to handle or help people who go through a crisis of faith.  Very disappointing... 

I think that a father would know more about how to help his own daughter than you do.  I imagine that their discussion encompassed more than just the notes that Rongo took, or that was even related in the conference.

You also do not seem to be giving sufficient weight to these statements you quoted:

"I talked with her about the questions and issues she had"

"God answered her in the primary program. She had a powerful spiritual witness while the children were singing"

It sounds like they did talk together and discuss the situation.  I not sure how you can make the judgement that he "dismiss[ed] the question" based on just this.

You are being quick to condemn this fathers approach, which you have third hand, and are dismissing the spiritual witness and answers given by a loving Father in Heave to this daughter during the primary program.

 

"church leaders have no clue how to handle or help people who go through a crisis of faith."  Hopefully our church leaders don't judge and condemn others as quickly as you are here.

Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin.

[stemelbow]

28 minutes ago, blueglass said:

the doubts response was revealing.  A seventy acknowledging that his own daughter in her 40's had a faith crisis after hearing things she hadn't heard before that threw her for a loop?  Then he scolds the bishop for admitting he has had doubts too?  His daughter then scolds the bishop from the perspective that bishops with doubts are losers.   The seventy then doesn't walk through the "things [his daughter] hadn't heard before" he just says the key is just remember that as a primary child you had a powerful spiritual witness.  More detail please!  How to help not harm?    

I'm glad someone said it.

 

My guess is the daughter still has doubts, but committed to not to talk to her dad about them again.  It was likely a crazy experience the notion that she felt the spirit while kids were singing convinces me.  Even us doubters can feel good when kids sing at us.  Reading the notes gave me the impression he has no clue what people are dealing with and doesn't seem to care (noting his daughter's friend is out of the Church seemed unnecessary but also something used to help her from his perspective). 

The notion that a bishop should be anything but genuine when someone brings up doubts is just ridiculously bad.  "do your best to help and not harm..." as if talking about doubts is harmful. 

And

Her father became her sure foundation?  Ugh...there's so much bad about that I can't imagine anyone considers this good.

Edited September 20, 2017 by stemelbow

[ALarson]

9 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Pick a doctrine, and I would put money on any doctrine you pick that in 100 years from now it will have changed substantively.  Doctrines evolve, get discarded, are deemphasized, new ideas emerge.  Change will happen whether you want it to or not, and history our guide that this is true.  Feeling that something will "never change" is delusional thinking.  

The only thing that seems to be a sure thing is that change will continue to occur and teachings/policies will continue to evolve and change.  IOW, never say never unless you're ready to be proven wrong.

[hope_for_things]

4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I would agree that such a sure foundation is not guaranteed to last, but let's not pretend like we know anything about this woman or her relationship with her father.  I don't see any reason to even put it out there that she might not have been being honest with him.

I know nothing about these people, this is just speculation based on experiences where I've seen that kind of dynamic develop.  The words used to describe how he handled the situation, including telling her to put her trust in him.  None of that is good advice, and its actually opposed to gospel principles, tell your child her her late 40s to have faith in you?  Who do you think you are?  This is very bad counsel all across the board, my speculation is based on what I've seen in the lives of people struggling with faith crisis, and its just speculation, yes.  

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, ALarson said:

That's true too.  On the information given, it doesn't look positive but there may be much more to the story.

Which actually might be part of the problem.  Why would he give advice like this?  Or else the notes are bad or incomplete.  Anything is possible.

Also not everyone has a sure foundation daddy to rely on. 

[blueglass]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I would agree that such a sure foundation is not guaranteed to last, but let's not pretend like we know anything about this woman or her relationship with her father.  I don't see any reason to even put it out there that she might not have been being honest with him.

For me, one of the strongest spiritual experiences I had in primary was singing the "spirit of God" as a stake conference children's choir.   I will always treasure those and hope for more in the future.  In other ways I feel like the 2nd most quoted in general conference non-mormon  GA "NW Clerk" "My idea of God is not a divine idea. It has to be shattered time after time. He shatters it Himself."  

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I think that a father would know more about how to help his own daughter than you do.  I imagine that their discussion encompassed more than just the notes that Rongo took, or that was even related in the conference.

You also do not seem to be giving sufficient weight to these statements you quoted:

"I talked with her about the questions and issues she had"

"God answered her in the primary program. She had a powerful spiritual witness while the children were singing"

It sounds like they did talk together and discuss the situation.  I not sure how you can make the judgement that he "dismiss[ed] the question" based on just this.

You are being quick to condemn this fathers approach, which you have third hand, and are dismissing the spiritual witness and answers given by a loving Father in Heave to this daughter during the primary program.

 

"church leaders have no clue how to handle or help people who go through a crisis of faith."  Hopefully our church leaders don't judge and condemn others as quickly as you are here.

Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin.

Well I haven't seen many who have doubts that are troubling enough that she talks to her bishop and GA father, just snap those doubts out of existence because they felt good when the children sing.  It sounds unlikely. 

I am curious how recently this was though.

[hope_for_things]

2 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I think that a father would know more about how to help his own daughter than you do.  I imagine that their discussion encompassed more than just the notes that Rongo took, or that was even related in the conference.

You also do not seem to be giving sufficient weight to these statements you quoted:

"I talked with her about the questions and issues she had"

"God answered her in the primary program. She had a powerful spiritual witness while the children were singing"

It sounds like they did talk together and discuss the situation.  I not sure how you can make the judgement that he "dismiss[ed] the question" based on just this.

You are being quick to condemn this fathers approach, which you have third hand, and are dismissing the spiritual witness and answers given by a loving Father in Heave to this daughter during the primary program.

 

"church leaders have no clue how to handle or help people who go through a crisis of faith."  Hopefully our church leaders don't judge and condemn others as quickly as you are here.

Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin.

I believe this father is clueless, no offense, but he has no clue about faith crisis or how to treat people going through these issues.  I only needed one paragraph to make that assessment, and I'm confident in it.  That said, I'm sure he knows his daughter better than me, I don't know her at all.

I'm making judgments about the content of this talk, same as you, and since neither of our judgments are based on any personal knowledge of these people, we start at the same point on the judgment scale.  Also, you cropped out my qualifying adjective in that quote "many church leaders have no clue", that word many is an important qualifier.  

[hope_for_things]

6 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Also not everyone has a sure foundation daddy to rely on. 

Isn't this an example of D&C 121 right here?  Get a little authority and it goes to your head.  

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

Pick a doctrine, and I would put money on any doctrine you pick that in 100 years from now it will have changed substantively.  Doctrines evolve, get discarded, are deemphasized, new ideas emerge.  Change will happen whether you want it to or not, and history our guide that this is true.  Feeling that something will "never change" is delusional thinking.  

OK. I pick the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Hasn't changed since the Restoration in 1830.

Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins is another.

And faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

And salvation for the dead. (There may have been something of a false start with the "law of adoption," but once that was ironed out, things have been on an even keel.)

Or any of the other temple doctrines revealed during the Nauvoo period.

Or the corporeal nature of God.

Or  Sabbath Day observance.

Or the latter-day gathering of Israel and the grand commission to take the gospel to every nation, kindred, tongue and people.

Or the law of chastity, prohibiting non-marital or extramarital sexual relations.

Or the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon (wink, wink, nudge, nudge).

Or the doctrine of revelation.

Or the doctrine of the resurrection.

Or the doctrine that those who remain faithful will be exalted and dwell with God and inherit jointly with Christ all that the Father has.

Or the other doctrines associated with the plan of salvation: the pre-mortal existence, mortality as a probationary perioid, the spirit world, the preaching to the spirits in prison, the final judgment, the three degrees of glory, etc.

The above have remained unchanged in the last 100 years.

Do you need more examples, or have I made my point?

Edited September 20, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[hope_for_things]

11 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

OK. I pick the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Hasn't changed since the Restoration in 1830.

Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins is another.

And faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

And salvation for the dead. (There may have been something of a false start with the "law of adoption," but once that was ironed out, things have been on an even keel.)

Or any of the other temple doctrines revealed during the Nauvoo period.

Or the corporeal nature of God.

Or  Sabbath Day observance.

Or the latter-day gathering of Israel and the grand commission to take the gospel to every nation, kindred, tongue and people.

Or the law of chastity, prohibiting non-marital or extramarital sexual relations.

Or the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon (wink, wink, nudge, nudge).

Or the doctrine of revelation.

The above have remained unchanged in the last 100 years.

I think pretty much everything you've listed has evolved to some extent in the last century, but some more than others, especially the wink, wink, nudge, nudge doctrine, that one has changed drastically!