Rivers Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 (edited) When Pres. Packet spoke in GC conference he was so frail and sickly that I couldn't understand him. So I recently read the transcript. Pres. Packer talks about sexual sin a lot but this time, to my surprise, he spoke much about the positive side of sexuality. It's a good read and may very well be his last talk in GC.https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/the-plan-of-happiness?lang=eng Edited April 9, 2015 by Rivers 1
VideoGameJunkie Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 I feel bad whenever Apostles get so weak and old in age. But it is inevitable. And soon we will have a lot of new Apostles.
stemelbow Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 Packer get's grief from critics for sure. But sometimes what I notice is his talks seem to hurt people in the Church too. Things like this: The power of procreation is not an incidental part of the plan; it is the plan of happiness; it is the key to happiness. But romantic love is incomplete; it is a prelude. Love is nourished by the coming of children, who spring from that fountain of life entrusted to couples in marriage. Seem to neglect those who remain single, or lack the ability to participate in the power of procreation. Sometimes I focus too much on what might push people away rather than the overall message. I get all caught up in people's talks for the trees that seem to reach down and smack some people around, unnecessarily. 2
cinepro Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 Packer get's grief from critics for sure. But sometimes what I notice is his talks seem to hurt people in the Church too.Things like this:Seem to neglect those who remain single, or lack the ability to participate in the power of procreation. Sometimes I focus too much on what might push people away rather than the overall message. I get all caught up in people's talks for the trees that seem to reach down and smack some people around, unnecessarily. There is a general principle where leaders "teach the rule, not the exception", but having known couples who struggled to have children, I can only imagine how they feel hearing such statements. 4
ERayR Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 Packer get's grief from critics for sure. But sometimes what I notice is his talks seem to hurt people in the Church too.Things like this:Seem to neglect those who remain single, or lack the ability to participate in the power of procreation. Sometimes I focus too much on what might push people away rather than the overall message. I get all caught up in people's talks for the trees that seem to reach down and smack some people around, unnecessarily. Would you neglect giving much needed counsel to married couples because it seems to neglect singles? 2
stemelbow Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 Would you neglect giving much needed counsel to married couples because it seems to neglect singles? not at all. But I would not advocate for, say, people who are attracted to those of the same sex to remain single and celibate for their lives then suggest that they simply can't be a part of the plan of happiness.
cinepro Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 (edited) Would you neglect giving much needed counsel to married couples because it seems to neglect singles? I don't think you don't need to tell married couples, or singles for that matter, how awesome sex is, or that sex makes babies. Also, the phrasing of this comment is also a little odd: But romantic love is incomplete; it is a prelude. Love is nourished by the coming of children, who spring from that fountain of life entrusted to couples in marriage. We all know that "that fountain of life" isn't just entrusted to couples in marriage. It would probably have made more sense to say "that fountain of life that should be only entrusted to couples in marriage" or something like that. Edited April 9, 2015 by cinepro
Scott Lloyd Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 (edited) There is a general principle where leaders "teach the rule, not the exception", but having known couples who struggled to have children, I can only imagine how they feel hearing such statements.President Packer addressed this in his talk. I quoted it in another thread. Edited April 9, 2015 by Scott Lloyd 1
Rivers Posted April 9, 2015 Author Posted April 9, 2015 (edited) Why is it that GC talks about marriage and family seem to have more push-back than any other topic? Edited April 9, 2015 by Rivers 3
Popular Post Mystery Meat Posted April 9, 2015 Popular Post Posted April 9, 2015 Why is it that GC talks about marriage and family seem to have more push-back than any other topic? Because people aren't happy if they aren't finding something to complain about, even if it is not there. I am a single person, who would love nothing more than to be married. So far, it hasn't even come close to panning out. If other single folk can't appreciate Elder Packer's talk or expect the church to not address sacred topics so they don't get their feelings hurt...well I don't know what to say. As for me, it was one of the highlights for conference for me. 7
Popular Post Scott Lloyd Posted April 9, 2015 Popular Post Posted April 9, 2015 (edited) Because people aren't happy if they aren't finding something to complain about, even if it is not there. I am a single person, who would love nothing more than to be married. So far, it hasn't even come close to panning out. If other single folk can't appreciate Elder Packer's talk or expect the church to not address sacred topics so they don't get their feelings hurt...well I don't know what to say. As for me, it was one of the highlights for conference for me.I was single and longing to be married for quite a while. During that time, I was a ready participant in priesthood and Sunday School lessons on marriage and family.The principles hold true regardless of one's station in life. Edited April 9, 2015 by Scott Lloyd 7
Scott Lloyd Posted April 9, 2015 Posted April 9, 2015 (edited) I don't think you don't need to tell married couples, or singles for that matter, how awesome sex is, or that sex makes babies. Also, the phrasing of this comment is also a little odd: We all know that "that fountain of life" isn't just entrusted to couples in marriage. It would probably have made more sense to say "that fountain of life that should be only entrusted to couples in marriage" or something like that.It is only entrusted to them. Others are forbidden to engage in it, although they might seize it in ignorance or defiance of divine law. Edited April 10, 2015 by Scott Lloyd 3
Tacenda Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 I was told his polio came back, by a gal in my ward. Is that possible? Btw, I think it's sweet that he spoke about his marriage, but with his talks about homosexuality in the past, some people may have misconceptions about what his talks are.
VideoGameJunkie Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 Tacenda, homosexuality in the past? Boyd K. Packer was a homosexual????
Tacenda Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 Tacenda, homosexuality in the past? Boyd K. Packer was a homosexual????I doubt that, I mean his talks on homosexuality. Surely you've heard them, or are you messing with me?
VideoGameJunkie Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 I'm both messing with you and I never heard his talks in the past. I never really paid attention in General Conference unless it was the prophet until a few years ago.
Popular Post The Nehor Posted April 10, 2015 Popular Post Posted April 10, 2015 Because people aren't happy if they aren't finding something to complain about, even if it is not there. I am a single person, who would love nothing more than to be married. So far, it hasn't even come close to panning out. If other single folk can't appreciate Elder Packer's talk or expect the church to not address sacred topics so they don't get their feelings hurt...well I don't know what to say. As for me, it was one of the highlights for conference for me. I admit there are times when talks on families and family responsibilities and marriage have twisted a knife emotionally. It is hard not to envy the loving couple in sacrament meeting or the adorable toddler who makes faces at me. Even being around my nieces and nephews can be bittersweet despite how much I enjoy them. It can hurt but I put on my big boy garments and deal with it. My pain is mine and not because of the speaker teaching things that need to be taught or because others are more blessed right now. I don't know whether my deficiency is due to a personal shortcoming or shortcomings, some extended trial, or is just part of some larger plan for the happiness of myself and/or others that makes no sense at the moment. I am here to submit my will to Gods not covet that which he has not seen fit to give me no matter how righteous the desire for it is. 9
Rivers Posted April 10, 2015 Author Posted April 10, 2015 It is hard not to envy the loving couple in sacrament meeting or the adorable toddler who makes faces at me. Even being around my nieces and nephews can be bittersweet despite how much I enjoy them.I know exactly what you mean. It really sucks. Big time. But I don't complain every time I hear a talk about family. 3
Scott Lloyd Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 I admit there are times when talks on families and family responsibilities and marriage have twisted a knife emotionally. It is hard not to envy the loving couple in sacrament meeting or the adorable toddler who makes faces at me. Even being around my nieces and nephews can be bittersweet despite how much I enjoy them. It can hurt but I put on my big boy garments and deal with it. My pain is mine and not because of the speaker teaching things that need to be taught or because others are more blessed right now. I don't know whether my deficiency is due to a personal shortcoming or shortcomings, some extended trial, or is just part of some larger plan for the happiness of myself and/or others that makes no sense at the moment. I am here to submit my will to Gods not covet that which he has not seen fit to give me no matter how righteous the desire for it is.It was that sort of attitude that got me through.
Kenngo1969 Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 not at all. But I would not advocate for, say, people who are attracted to those of the same sex to remain single and celibate for their lives then suggest that they simply can't be a part of the plan of happiness.Why do you think President Packer was suggesting that those with SSA "simply can't be a part of the plan of happiness"? 1
ERayR Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 not at all. But I would not advocate for, say, people who are attracted to those of the same sex to remain single and celibate for their lives then suggest that they simply can't be a part of the plan of happiness. I think you have some serious misconceptions.
stemelbow Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 Why do you think President Packer was suggesting that those with SSA "simply can't be a part of the plan of happiness"? Hey Kenngo. I admit I get a little worried about many people who are close to me, when I hear these types of things. For instance, I have a dear friend. He's gay. he loves the Church, but when he hears things like what Elder Packer says, he's hurt. You see, he was told, most recently by Elder Oaks, it is recommended he stay single and celibate--going into a heterosexual marriage can be problematic for him--for the rest of his life. But Elder Packer says, the plan of happiness is really only available for those who can practice the power of procreation--saying that procreation is the plan of happiness and the key to happiness, gives him a quick slap in the face. Surely he takes it on the chin. He deals with it. He tries to refocus on that which is important to him. But it still hurts. It still feels like, to him, that he is not a part of the whole plan. That's he's not loved and appreciated, seeing as someone is out there claiming he has no part, for the rest of his life, in what is the plan of happiness. Hope that little example of one dear friend makes sense regarding my previous point. And thanks for asking. 1
stemelbow Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 I think you have some serious misconceptions. we all do. But if I do, I'd like to understand what those are and why, rather than just being told I'm wrong.
mnn727 Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 Packer get's grief from critics for sure. But sometimes what I notice is his talks seem to hurt people in the Church too.Things like this:Seem to neglect those who remain single, or lack the ability to participate in the power of procreation. Sometimes I focus too much on what might push people away rather than the overall message. I get all caught up in people's talks for the trees that seem to reach down and smack some people around, unnecessarily.As one of those couples that were not blessed with children, I am fine with talks like this. It used to bother my wife a lot, until an inspired Bishop called her to Primary, she's still there after 7 years and they're all 'her kids' 2
Russell C McGregor Posted April 10, 2015 Posted April 10, 2015 I've always admired President Packer and enjoyed his talks. I find them invariably uplifting and positive. The reason why he gets so much grief from "critics" is clearly explained in 1 Nephi 16:2. Regards, Russell 2
Recommended Posts