Regional Priesthood Leadership Conference

[jkwilliams]

6 minutes ago, ALarson said:

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.

No, I hadn't heard of that, but coming out is a tough thing. I personally wouldn't think a testimony meeting is a good venue for that, but then I don't know anything about this incident, so I don't know why she made that choice. Either way, I don't know that coming out is necessarily putting oneself in opposition to the church. I suppose it depends what the young girl said and how she said it (I assume she was young, based on what you said). But let's not derail the thread into a discussion of that incident. 

[cinepro]

4 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

No, I hadn't heard of that, but coming out is a tough thing. I personally wouldn't think a testimony meeting is a good venue for that, but then I don't know anything about this incident, so I don't know why she made that choice. Either way, I don't know that coming out is necessarily putting oneself in opposition to the church. I suppose it depends what the young girl said and how she said it (I assume she was young, based on what you said). But let's not derail the thread into a discussion of that incident. 

For some reason, when the issue with Savannah (the girl who got up in F&T meeting and read a prepared speech about her being gay) comes up, people forget that she spoke for almost 90 seconds after "coming out", and the mic was only cut after she said she wants to get (gay) married one day and that she thinks God is a-ok with that.

 

[ALarson]

8 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

No, I hadn't heard of that, but coming out is a tough thing. I personally wouldn't think a testimony meeting is a good venue for that, but then I don't know anything about this incident, so I don't know why she made that choice. Either way, I don't know that coming out is necessarily putting oneself in opposition to the church. I suppose it depends what the young girl said and how she said it (I assume she was young, based on what you said). But let's not derail the thread into a discussion of that incident. 

She was 12 years old and got up and read a prepared, written statement (one she'd apparently been wanting to give for awhile).  The counselor (I think?) interrupted her and asked her to sit down and in hindsight (and later learning she was almost done), it probably might have been better just to allow her to finish and not embarrass her.  It ended up being an incident that caused more bad PR for the church (embarrassing a 12 year old).  She did say she wanted to get married (SSM) and I can see how the person presiding over the meeting was in a horribly tough spot and handled it how he thought was best.

This might be why Scott asked if there was more instructions on how to handle anything like this in the future.

Edited September 20, 2017 by ALarson

[cinepro]

5 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

The iPhone comparison is laughable.

I agree. 

A much better analogy would be the Samsung Galaxy Note 7, which didn't work like it was supposed to, ended up being a huge embarrassment and liability to Samsung, and lost them a ton of customers once word got out.

Edited September 20, 2017 by cinepro

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, cinepro said:

For some reason, when the issue with Savannah (the girl who got up in F&T meeting and read a prepared speech about her being gay) comes up, people forget that she spoke for almost 90 seconds after "coming out", and the mic was only cut after she said she wants to get (gay) married one day and that she thinks God is a-ok with that.

I can imagine that didn't go over well.  

I guess we don't get a lot of news about Mormonism here in Virginia.

[Jeanne]

5 hours ago, bluebell said:

This happened at our last Stake conference.  The area authority brought it up without really needing too.  I wonder if there's been some kind of direction given on getting that out there to seem less surprising to people.

But really...he needs to bring it up...way past time.

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

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.  

I just think it's in bad taste to speculate negative things about someone when there's no evidence to support it.

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, ALarson said:

She was 12 years old and got up and read a prepared, written statement (one she'd apparently been wanting to give for awhile).  The counselor (I think?) interrupted her and asked her to sit down and in hindsight (and later learning she was almost done), it probably might have been better just to allow her to finish and not embarrass her.  It ended up being an incident that caused more bad PR for the church (embarrassing a 12 year old).  She did say she wanted to get married (SSM) and I can see how the person presiding over the meeting was in a horribly tough spot and handled it how he thought was best.

This might be why Scott asked if there was more instructions on how to handle anything like this in the future.

I'd imagine it would be a difficult situation. 

[cinepro]

4 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I can imagine that didn't go over well.  

I guess we don't get a lot of news about Mormonism here in Virginia.

It made national news...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/19/us/coming-out-as-mormon-and-gay-trnd/index.html

and international news...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mormon-girl-savannah-comes-out-gay-lesbian-congregation-mic-cut-off-a7795746.html

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, blueglass said:

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."  

That's really cool.  I don't remember anything about being in primary other than it was during the time when they were having us 'mark' our scriptures by coloring pictures on some verses.  Not the best idea that ever existed.  I remember drawing a mace on a scripture.  Who can even say why.

I think that he was saying that his daughter had a spiritual experience while she was listening to the primary program in sacrament though, not that she was relying on a spiritual experience she had as a child while she was in primary.  

[jkwilliams]

Just now, cinepro said:

It made national news...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/19/us/coming-out-as-mormon-and-gay-trnd/index.html

and international news...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mormon-girl-savannah-comes-out-gay-lesbian-congregation-mic-cut-off-a7795746.html

Maybe it just speaks more to me not paying attention to LDS-related news, which in my case is a good thing. 

[cinepro]

I thought this was pretty interesting:

Let me tell you the automatic rejection criteria. If a candidate has had any of the following, they will 100% be excused from missionary service. We have learned that the stresses of missionary service will 100% result in them having bad episodes on their mission, and after returning early, they tend to take much longer healing.

a) any diagnosis for bi-polar

b) any diagnosis for schizophrenia

c) any attempted suicide

d) any diagnosis for eating disorder

e) any homosexual act after the age of 16

There are new interview questions coming out for missionaries. They will be out in the next few months.

[cinepro]

Also, this:

We throw around the word addict a lot in referring to people with porn problems. We have to distinguish between a true addict, and someone who has incidents or episodes (this has to do with frequency and intensity --- i.e., affecting all areas of life).

[ksfisher]

7 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I thought this was pretty interesting:

Let me tell you the automatic rejection criteria. If a candidate has had any of the following, they will 100% be excused from missionary service. We have learned that the stresses of missionary service will 100% result in them having bad episodes on their mission, and after returning early, they tend to take much longer healing.

a) any diagnosis for bi-polar

b) any diagnosis for schizophrenia

c) any attempted suicide

d) any diagnosis for eating disorder

e) any homosexual act after the age of 16

There are new interview questions coming out for missionaries. They will be out in the next few months.

Sounds like a good list.  I had a mission companion who had a physically abusive mother.  It was a very difficult two months for me.

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

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.

 

Actually, I don't think there would be much in common with structure or liturgical forms, everything I've read about 19th century Mormonism sounds so foreign to me, can you imagine speaking in tongues, and even the sacrament meetings weren't very much like today. 

What i think might be familiar is the cannon, but the preaching style and the cadence of meetings and the things emphasized I think would all be foreign.  I picture that really weird testimony that someone gives on occasion that really stands out, something about a three Nephites story or a vision of some kind, and then turn up the magnitude and multiply it across multiple people, that's what I think it would be like.  

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

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.

I wouldn't have a tough time at all.  I'm pointing you to some resources in case you're curious.  Lots of substantive things, unless you're implying that the work of folks like Mr. Given's isn't substantive.  

[blueglass]

41 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

But really...he needs to bring it up...way past time.

Do you think they should bring it up in seminary?  My daughter is a Jr in HS and studying book of Mormon this year.  The seminary teacher didn't say anything about it.  My daughter read rough stone rolling a couple years ago as a requirement before getting a cell phone - so she was looking out for it.  

[blueglass]

2 hours 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.

 

That may be true if you're white, not a polygamist, and not a "lamanite" new convert from Guatemala.  

[ALarson]

9 minutes ago, blueglass said:

Do you think they should bring it up in seminary?  My daughter is a Jr in HS and studying book of Mormon this year.  The seminary teacher didn't say anything about it.  My daughter read rough stone rolling a couple years ago as a requirement before getting a cell phone - so she was looking out for it.  

Too bad she didn't raise her hand and ask the teacher about it (that can be tough to do though).  I do think it's been added to the lesson material (or maybe that's just the new institute manuals?  Can't remember now....).   The teacher still may know nothing about the head in the hat translation method.  Just as with polygamy, I find that a great many members still don't know any specifics or details regarding how it was lived by Joseph.  I know the leaders are slowly getting it out there....but I do believe they could put it more front and center where all (or close to all) members would learn about these.

Edited September 20, 2017 by ALarson

[Jeanne]

20 minutes ago, blueglass said:

Do you think they should bring it up in seminary?  My daughter is a Jr in HS and studying book of Mormon this year.  The seminary teacher didn't say anything about it.  My daughter read rough stone rolling a couple years ago as a requirement before getting a cell phone - so she was looking out for it.  

Yes!!!  Yes!!  Everyone seems to think that I should have know..but back in 1974...nothing like this..and so when I learned of this..really learned..I yearned to speak with peers of my youth...and discuss those things that were not a primary picture ago. I commend you for having a kind of faith that lets your daughter learn..arrive at some sort of conclusions and ask questions..but what can she ask..if not told all sides of a story. 

Edited September 20, 2017 by Jeanne

[provoman]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

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.

Race and the Priesthood at the time frame mentioned by the other poster?

 

However, I tend to agree that as for Doctrine - teachings/publications/statements/letters - that have the stamp of approval from the First Presidency of the time there likely is not much in terms of eternal slavation that is different, other than already mentioned

Edited September 20, 2017 by provoman

[Scott Lloyd]

23 minutes ago, blueglass said:

That may be true if you're white, not a polygamist, and not a "lamanite" new convert from Guatemala.  

I don't know what you're alluding to with the remarks about being white or not being polygamist. But I'm thinking it's probably not important anyway.

As for the remark about Lamanite's I don't hold with the notion that all bets are off regarding descendants of indigenous peoples in the Americas being descended from Lehi. Because of the likelihood of mixing and intermarriage between the populations, I still think it quite likely that all or virtually all Amerinds are indeed descendants of Lehi.

So nope, no change in the doctrine pertaining to the Book of Mormon, though there has been some refinement in previous, undoctrinal, unbinding assumptions.

[Scott Lloyd]

11 minutes ago, provoman said:

What was the wink wink nudge nudge doctrine on Race and the Priesthood at the time frame mentioned by the other poster?

Private joke.

"The other poster" is one of those who disputes the historicity of the Book of Mormon but harbors the inconsistent notion that it is "inspired fiction," not the fraud that it must surely be if it is not the ancient record it purports to be.

Edited September 20, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[ALarson]

17 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Yes!!!  Yes!!  Everyone seems to think that I should have know..but back in 1974...nothing like this..and so when I learned of this..really learned..I yearned to speak with peers of my youth...and discuss those things that were not a primary picture ago. I commend you for having a kind of faith that lets your daughter learn..arrive at some sort of conclusions and ask questions..but what can she ask..if not told all sides of a story. 

Also, she can ask questions in seminary, but if the teachers aren't knowledgeable enough to know the answers, that's just one more of the problems.  I do believe this could be remedied rather quickly, but I feel the leaders are moving very slowly at getting information out there.  But at lease they are moving now 

Edited September 20, 2017 by ALarson

[Scott Lloyd]

56 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Actually, I don't think there would be much in common with structure or liturgical forms, everything I've read about 19th century Mormonism sounds so foreign to me, can you imagine speaking in tongues, and even the sacrament meetings weren't very much like today. 

What i think might be familiar is the cannon, but the preaching style and the cadence of meetings and the things emphasized I think would all be foreign.  I picture that really weird testimony that someone gives on occasion that really stands out, something about a three Nephites story or a vision of some kind, and then turn up the magnitude and multiply it across multiple people, that's what I think it would be like.  

I believe there would be more commonality than you think, but the time frame stemelbow suggested was 100 years, wherein he claimed that someone from 1917 would not recognize the Church today.

Well, my dad was born in 1903 and my mom in 1908. So both were old enough to have clear memories of 1917, and both would attest that the Church would have been quite recognizable at the time they died in the 1990s from what it was in 1917.