Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Regional Priesthood Leadership Conference


rongo

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

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!  

I'm guessing if an average Mormon from 1870 was plucked from his place and plopped down in 2017 and told "these are the Mormons."  He'd say, "hell no they aren't".  Likely the same response would come from one from 1917 as well. 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I'm guessing if an average Mormon from 1870 was plucked from his place and plopped down in 2017 and told "these are the Mormons."  He'd say, "hell no they aren't".  Likely the same response would come from one from 1917 as well. 

At the least, that person would wonder where all the beards went, and what's this strange thing about green jello!  

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

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!  

I think you would have a hard time showing any substantive change in any of those items within the last century, especially the wink-wink-nudge-nudge one. Unless you are entertaining some sort of wishful fantasy about it.

 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, rongo said:

The elder handled it much, much better than some of you are assuming, or than my brief representation seemed. He had a long talk with his daughter about her concerns, and while it wasn't fully resolved after that (that happened, for her, in the primary program when she had a strong witness). He also didn't throw the bishop under the bus. Not at all! The takeaway was for leaders not to give a shaky foundation when helping people with doubts. This included when empathizing. I agree with him that one must be careful in this, because sometimes how we do this does more harm (or at least doesn't help at all).

From my experience dealing with people in faith crisis, the child/parent relationship is one of the most difficult to manage.  I know many people who haven't been completely forthcoming with their parents about their faith journey, myself included.  We often try to shield the ones we love and set boundaries in order to protect ourselves and others, and I think this is natural and healthy to some extent.  My hunch is that this daughter may not have disclosed everything to her father because of her respect and desire for him to be happy.  

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I'm guessing if an average Mormon from 1870 was plucked from his place and plopped down in 2017 and told "these are the Mormons."  He'd say, "hell no they aren't".  Likely the same response would come from one from 1917 as well. 

Well, you are entitled to your fantasies along with everyone else, I suppose.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think you would have a hard time showing any substantive change in any of those items within the last century, especially the wink-wink-nudge-nudge one. Unless you are entertaining some sort of wishful fantasy about it.

 

Lots of good work on evolution of doctrine has been done in essays and books.  I like Charlie Harrell's book because its such a good resource, but I've heard good things about Terryl Given's new books.  

Link to comment
43 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

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.

While the account is brief there is no reason to imagine that the discussion between the father and his daughter was. 

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

At the least, that person would wonder where all the beards went, and what's this strange thing about green jello!  

I imagine it would be something like attending Church services in a foreign land. The culture and perhaps the dress and grooming would seem different, but the structure, the liturgical forms, even the hymns,  would be very recognizable.

 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
1 minute ago, rongo said:

The elder handled it much, much better than some of you are assuming, or than my brief representation seemed. He had a long talk with his daughter about her concerns, and while it wasn't fully resolved after that (that happened, for her, in the primary program when she had a strong witness). He also didn't throw the bishop under the bus. Not at all! The takeaway was for leaders not to give a shaky foundation when helping people with doubts. This included when empathizing. I agree with him that one must be careful in this, because sometimes how we do this does more harm (or at least doesn't help at all).

I appreciate the clarification.  Are you saying he said her doubts are now fully resolved?  I wonder what that would mean, particularly since the report is they somehow melted away because she felt inspired listening to the primary sing--a very unrelated issue. 

So if a bishop has doubts and someone comes in to express doubts, the bishop agrees, should the bishop

a)not respond (pretend like he didn't hear or didn't understand?)

b)pretend he doesn't have doubts or at least not the same doubts

c)say he has doubts too, but that they don't really mean anything to him so they shouldn't bother anyone?

I'm curious.  Our stake a year or two ago was given, basically, opposite advice by a 70.  If someone expresses his or her doubts,

a) never be dismissive or accusatory. 

b) Always acknowledge the problems when you are aware of them--acknowledge there are problems, and specifically if you are aware of the problems acknowledge the concern that they cause.   

We were told to do anything else only leads to more problems and is, essentially, heartless. 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Lots of good work on evolution of doctrine has been done in essays and books.  I like Charlie Harrell's book because its such a good resource, but I've heard good things about Terryl Given's new books.  

So you're essentially going to ignore my comment, then, that you would have a tough time showing substantive change in any of the items I listed.

That's fine.

Link to comment

I certainly think certain doctrines have been given more emphasis over the years, for example in the 1930's the word atonement was mentioned 52 times in General Conference and in the 2000s it was mentioned 575 times. The lowest amount of times and it could be the reporting was in the 1860's with 37 mentions and the highest was in our decade with so far 663 mentions. 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

While the account is brief there is no reason to imagine that the discussion between the father and his daughter was. 

of course there is reason.  I expressed what I saw as reasons.  judging by what we have I can't tell what the advice was, other than drop any pretense to being genuine with one another. 

Link to comment
5 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

Incidentally, rongo, the term "area authority" is no longer used.

That position is called Area Seventy, denoting men who are called to serve part time in a specific geographical area for a number of years and then released. They comprise the Third through the Eighth Quorums of the Seventy.

The name is to draw an distinction between these men and those who are now called General Authority Seventies, they who serve until age 70 and then are granted emeritus status. They comprise the First and Second Quorums of the Seventy.

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment

rongo, I asked you this in an earlier thread where you alluded to this conference, but the thread got closed before you responded. So I'll pose the question again here:

In the part where they talked about dissent and dissenters in the Church, was there any instruction given regarding how to deal with those who would try to hijack fast and testimony meeting with contra-doctrinal declarations, antagonism, exit stories and the like?

 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

rongo, I asked you this in an earlier thread where you alluded to this conference, but the thread got closed before you responded. So I'll pose the question again here:

In the part where they talked about dissent and dissenters in the Church, was there any instruction given regarding how to deal with those who would try to hijack fast and testimony meeting with contra-doctrinal declarations, antagonism, exit stories and the like?

Is this a common occurrence? I've never seen this happen before. Sure, there's always the ward member who gets up every month to talk about his or her pet beliefs, but I've never seen anyone use testimony meeting as a platform for dissent or apostasy. 

Link to comment
34 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I appreciate the clarification.  Are you saying he said her doubts are now fully resolved?  I wonder what that would mean, particularly since the report is they somehow melted away because she felt inspired listening to the primary sing--a very unrelated issue. 

He said that at this point, she is doing much better. It also wasn't that the primary program was a magical silver bullet. It was a link in the chain of healing salve. I equated it to myself with a powerful spiritual experience I had a year ago while looking through paperwork for the ward financial audit. Not usually looked at as an inspiring event . . . :) It's not the anchor of my testimony, but but it happened, and is one of the few times in my life where I had a powerful experience at once. I can see, given what she had been going through, the primary singing and teaching simple truths being a catalyst for needed testifying by the Spirit.

So if a bishop has doubts and someone comes in to express doubts, the bishop agrees, should the bishop



a)not respond (pretend like he didn't hear or didn't understand?)  

b)pretend he doesn't have doubts or at least not the same doubts 

c)say he has doubts too, but that they don't really mean anything to him so they shouldn't bother anyone?

I don't think he was saying any of this. It was more like she didn't feel that the bishop gave her any lifeline at all in acknowledging that he had struggled with the same things. Effective empathy lets people know that you understand, but also helps them resolve and shows them how. That isn't the feeling she left there with. Granted, I'm sure he did the best he could --- we were just counseled to learn from that and be self-aware of how our attempts at empathy might come across or be taken.

I'm curious.  Our stake a year or two ago was given, basically, opposite advice by a 70.  If someone expresses his or her doubts,

a) never be dismissive or accusatory. 

b) Always acknowledge the problems when you are aware of them--acknowledge there are problems, and specifically if you are aware of the problems acknowledge the concern that they cause.   

We were told to do anything else only leads to more problems and is, essentially, heartless.

I feel strongly that this was largely how he discussed the issues with his own daughter. And why it appears to have been effective in the long run (at this time, anyway).

Link to comment
25 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

rongo, I asked you this in an earlier thread where you alluded to this conference, but the thread got closed before you responded. So I'll pose the question again here:

In the part where they talked about dissent and dissenters in the Church, was there any instruction given regarding how to deal with those who would try to hijack fast and testimony meeting with contra-doctrinal declarations, antagonism, exit stories and the like?

No, that wasn't specifically mentioned. It's a tough scenario, when it happens.

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Is this a common occurrence? I've never seen this happen before. Sure, there's always the ward member who gets up every month to talk about his or her pet beliefs, but I've never seen anyone use testimony meeting as a platform for dissent or apostasy. 

You're not acquainted, then, with what has come to be known as the "Savanna incident"? I'll leave it to others to fill you in.

To answer your question, though, it's not a common occurrence insofar as I know, but I suppose if there is a precedent, it could happen again. And again. And again.

Link to comment
Just now, jkwilliams said:

Wow, things have changed in the church since I quit attending. 

I have rarely heard of or seen this happen (actually only once in all of my years of activity).  I think Scott is referring to what just occurred with the young girl revealing she is gay in a fast & testimony meeting.

I have wondered how my Bishop would have handled it.  He most likely would have let her finish rather than embarrass her, but would have called her in and talked to her after the meeting (and had a discussion with her parents as well, most likely).  That was a tough one.

Link to comment
Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

You're not acquainted, then, with what has come to be known as the "Savanna incident"? I'll leave it to others to fill you in.

To answer your question, though, it's not a common occurrence insofar as I know, but I suppose if there is a precedent, it could happen again. And again. And again.

No, I'm not familiar with that. Last time I ever heard of a sacrament meeting disrupted was when some Evangelicals stood up and started shouting anti-Mormon slurs in a testimony meeting in Huntsville, Texas, which was in our stake. That was about 10 years ago.

Believe it or not, I hardly ever pay attention to what is going on in the church. It's kind of nice not to have the emotional investment.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, rongo said:

The elder handled it much, much better than some of you are assuming, or than my brief representation seemed. He had a long talk with his daughter about her concerns, and while it wasn't fully resolved after that (that happened, for her, in the primary program when she had a strong witness). He also didn't throw the bishop under the bus. Not at all! The takeaway was for leaders not to give a shaky foundation when helping people with doubts. This included when empathizing. I agree with him that one must be careful in this, because sometimes how we do this does more harm (or at least doesn't help at all).

If I understand this right he is counseling priesthood leadership to become sure foundations of faith like he was temporarily for his daughter.  Then she felt the spirit strongly at the primary program which confirmed she was on the right path, -  that her heavenly father loved her?   Doctrine and covenants 46:14 "To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful."

I remember we had a 70 come to our stake conference and he shared how he was called to serve as a seventy, and was asked to bare his testimony at the leadership training with most of q12 in attendance.  He said he didn't give a very good testimony.  Elder bednar called him a few weeks later and invited him to meet with him at his home.  Elder Bednar then told him that the testimony he shared was weak and that he was concerned that the 70 did not have a testimony.  The 70 then turned to us and said as priesthood leadership in the stake we needed to give strong testimonies, or others would have doubts and fall away.  Then he ended the meeting with a mediocre testimony about how the movie "finding Nemo" has  one of the most profound messages he has heard in a long time.  "Keep on swimming".   

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, rongo said:

He said that at this point, she is doing much better. It also wasn't that the primary program was a magical silver bullet. It was a link in the chain of healing salve. I equated it to myself with a powerful spiritual experience I had a year ago while looking through paperwork for the ward financial audit. Not usually looked at as an inspiring event . . . :) It's not the anchor of my testimony, but but it happened, and is one of the few times in my life where I had a powerful experience at once. I can see, given what she had been going through, the primary singing and teaching simple truths being a catalyst for needed testifying by the Spirit.

 

 

It's interesting how the Lord can speak to us through otherwise mundane mediums. 

I had a similar (I'm guessing) experience when I was given  the tithing envelopes that had been relabeled to cover the name of the previous bishop.

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

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