Jump to content

Setting aside the rhetoric that some would consider inflammatory, does this article make any good points?


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 So much of what is falsely imputed as wrongdoing or secrecy may in actuality be more attributable to scarcity of resources.

Really?  You want to shift the discussion to the Church's "resources" and how it chooses to spend them?

  • Like 1
Link to post
20 hours ago, stemelbow said:

I'm charitable in that I say they both were really either unprepared and didn't know what they were saying, really, or they were prepared at least to some extent and really did a poor job in conveying the message.  But it's silly to say they didn't say what they did.  I'm surprised to see you continuing this game.  It doesn't sound like you.  

Let me put it a different way because I think we're talking past one an other.

Do we think Ballard and Oaks didn't know about the 1832 account they brought up, about post-manifesto polygamy, and about Nauvoo polygamy when talking about openness and transparency? I find that hard to believe. That means either they mean something else by it or (as the reddit conspiracies go) they were explicitly lying or as you note were just completely incompetent. To be charitable I'm dismissing the lying bit as I just don't buy the conspiracy theory.

That means we have incompetence or meaning something else. As you note they had a few notes and had the questions in advance. That suggests this wasn't pure incompetence but at best partial mangling. Since after he brings up the First Vision as an example of being open he talks about being honest, I'm suggesting what they mean is that they are honest in what they said, not that they say everything they know. That explains basically everything.

So I agree that the acontextual meaning of the sentence you and others have focused in on is that everything means everything. I just think that once you place it in the context everything doesn't mean all information is shared but rather than when they share things (so everything they share) they are honest, open, and transparent.

This entails some degree of incompetence because they weren't great speaking when not reading off cue cards. So they should have modified everything to make clear that they didn't intend to say every piece of information. 

Link to post
36 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Let me put it a different way because I think we're talking past one an other.

Do we think Ballard and Oaks didn't know about the 1832 account they brought up, about post-manifesto polygamy, and about Nauvoo polygamy when talking about openness and transparency? I find that hard to believe. That means either they mean something else by it or (as the reddit conspiracies go) they were explicitly lying or as you note were just completely incompetent. To be charitable I'm dismissing the lying bit as I just don't buy the conspiracy theory.

That means we have incompetence or meaning something else. As you note they had a few notes and had the questions in advance. That suggests this wasn't pure incompetence but at best partial mangling. Since after he brings up the First Vision as an example of being open he talks about being honest, I'm suggesting what they mean is that they are honest in what they said, not that they say everything they know. That explains basically everything.

So I agree that the acontextual meaning of the sentence you and others have focused in on is that everything means everything. I just think that once you place it in the context everything doesn't mean all information is shared but rather than when they share things (so everything they share) they are honest, open, and transparent.

This entails some degree of incompetence because they weren't great speaking when not reading off cue cards. So they should have modified everything to make clear that they didn't intend to say every piece of information. 

Alright.  I certainly can't say I know what he meant.  I only know what was said and that's what I was commenting on.  I'm fine if someone prefers to think they meant something other than they said.  I"d be particularly fine with it if they actually came out and said that they did not mean what they said, offering a retraction and clarification, but I don't see that coming.  Other than that, I'd say my issue in my response was when you accused me of misrepresenting what was said.  I don't think that happened.  

Link to post
On 11/27/2017 at 11:33 AM, FearlessFixxer said:

It's a great editorial with many strong points.  I think this one in particular is important:

"It starts with admitting mistakes were made. Not Steven Snow admitting it. Dallin Oaks needs to admit it. Russell Ballard needs to admit it. Every single man who wants the world to believe that they speak for God needs to look their followers in the eye and say that mistakes were made. This removes the ability for members of the Church to dismiss the issue and claim that those that doubt have no valid reason to do so."

Link to post
1 minute ago, rockpond said:

It's a great editorial with many strong points.  I think this one in particular is important:

"It starts with admitting mistakes were made. Not Steven Snow admitting it. Dallin Oaks needs to admit it. Russell Ballard needs to admit it. Every single man who wants the world to believe that they speak for God needs to look their followers in the eye and say that mistakes were made. This removes the ability for members of the Church to dismiss the issue and claim that those that doubt have no valid reason to do so."

And for some, Rockpond, the admittance of mistakes could take away blaming God. 

Link to post
2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

It's a great editorial with many strong points.  I think this one in particular is important:

"It starts with admitting mistakes were made. Not Steven Snow admitting it. Dallin Oaks needs to admit it. Russell Ballard needs to admit it. Every single man who wants the world to believe that they speak for God needs to look their followers in the eye and say that mistakes were made. This removes the ability for members of the Church to dismiss the issue and claim that those that doubt have no valid reason to do so."

Didn't FF know that Pres. Uchtdorf said as much? that leaders make mistakes? 

Link to post
51 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Let me put it a different way because I think we're talking past one an other.

Do we think Ballard and Oaks didn't know about the 1832 account they brought up, about post-manifesto polygamy, and about Nauvoo polygamy when talking about openness and transparency? I find that hard to believe. That means either they mean something else by it or (as the reddit conspiracies go) they were explicitly lying or as you note were just completely incompetent. To be charitable I'm dismissing the lying bit as I just don't buy the conspiracy theory.

That means we have incompetence or meaning something else. As you note they had a few notes and had the questions in advance. That suggests this wasn't pure incompetence but at best partial mangling. Since after he brings up the First Vision as an example of being open he talks about being honest, I'm suggesting what they mean is that they are honest in what they said, not that they say everything they know. That explains basically everything.

So I agree that the acontextual meaning of the sentence you and others have focused in on is that everything means everything. I just think that once you place it in the context everything doesn't mean all information is shared but rather than when they share things (so everything they share) they are honest, open, and transparent.

This entails some degree of incompetence because they weren't great speaking when not reading off cue cards. So they should have modified everything to make clear that they didn't intend to say every piece of information. 

I don't totally agree with your conclusions here.  But if your conclusions are correct, Ballard ought to issue a retraction and clarification.  Wouldn't the honesty and integrity he identifies with and the trust he asked for demand such an action?

Link to post
8 minutes ago, rockpond said:

It's a great editorial with many strong points.  I think this one in particular is important:

"It starts with admitting mistakes were made. Not Steven Snow admitting it. Dallin Oaks needs to admit it. Russell Ballard needs to admit it. Every single man who wants the world to believe that they speak for God needs to look their followers in the eye and say that mistakes were made. This removes the ability for members of the Church to dismiss the issue and claim that those that doubt have no valid reason to do so."

Read my post with dozens of quotes.  The church has sufficiently admitted as much and to pretend otherwise would be “gaslighting”.

Edited by pogi
  • Like 1
Link to post
2 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Didn't FF know that Pres. Uchtdorf said as much? that leaders make mistakes? 

Yes.  But that isn't quite what McKnight/Dodge say in the paragraph I quoted.  They wrote:

"Every single man who wants the world to believe that they speak for God needs to look their followers in the eye and say that mistakes were made."

I would add to that they should clarify what "mistakes" they are talking about.  For example, Ballard ought to come forward and admit that there have been attempt to hide important truths, facts, and documents from church membership.

Link to post
5 minutes ago, pogi said:

Read my post with dozens of quotes.  There church has sufficiently admitted as much and to pretend otherwise would be “gaslighting”.

I guess they need to admit it again, now, since Ballard just made such a massive mistake.  And then they ought to correct the mistake and admit that things have been hid.

Edited by rockpond
Link to post
43 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I guess they need to admit it again, now, since Ballard just made such a massive mistake.  And then they ought to correct the mistake and admit that things have been hid.

I guess Ryan and Ethan need to do the same thing.  Why so one sided?

 

Link to post
20 minutes ago, pogi said:

I guess Ryan and Ethan need to do the same thing.  Why so one sided?

 

To the extent that McKnight and Dodge have made mistakes, they ought to apologize and work to correct those.

Ballard, stood before (virtually) a large gathering of church members and under his title as an apostle, he claimed knowledge of the church history and leaders "from the beginning", made a far-reaching false statement, and then told members that we should trust him.  That kind of action, for me, requires a correction by Ballard.

  • Like 2
Link to post

Wikipedia provides this definition of gaslighting:

Gaslighting is a form of manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or in members of a targeted group, hoping to make them question their own memory, perception, and sanity. Using persistent denial, misdirection, contradiction, and lying, it attempts to destabilize the target and delegitimize the target's belief.

What Ballard said in the devotional most certainly qualified as gaslighting under this definition.  He claimed to have a knowledge of the history and leaders of the church "from the beginning" and then made a false claim and declared that he can be trusted.  I hope he'll issue a correction.

Link to post
On 11/28/2017 at 8:19 AM, FearlessFixxer said:

No that is not the definition of gaslighting is when someone tries to invalidate a person's lived experience by trying to get them to doubt it ever happened.  In the context of this article and mormnsim, it is commonly seen in the form of members claiming that the church has never tried to hide any aspects of its history. 

Which it has not done.

In which case, the accusation of "gaslighting" is a rather deliberate attempt to poison the well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, kiwi57 said:

Which it has not done.

You are taking the position that the church has not tried to hide aspects of its history?  Ever?

Elder Snow acknowledged that the church has done exactly that. 

Packer and Oaks have both told CES that they shouldn’t share everything. 

Ballard’s “gone are the days” quote to CES, while not totally clear, certainly had that connotation. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
6 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Let's say Elder Ballard does clarify, I bet that still wouldn't get McKnight and Dodge et al to come back to Church

It’s tough to get people back once they’ve left.  I think it’s important to help people stay.  That’s where I think a retraction/correction/clarification or whatever you want to call it would be good.  Especially if he wants to be trusted.  And it seems that he does. 

Link to post
1 minute ago, rockpond said:

It’s tough to get people back once they’ve left.  I think it’s important to help people stay.  That’s where I think a retraction/correction/clarification or whatever you want to call it would be good.  Especially if he wants to be trusted.  And it seems that he does. 

that's fair

Link to post
On 11/28/2017 at 7:33 AM, FearlessFixxer said:

Why should we set aside the deliberately manipulative and inflammatory rhetoric? It shows how the anti-Mormon propagandists who produced this hate spiel are trying to influence opinion. As such, it is relevant.

  • Like 1
Link to post
24 minutes ago, rockpond said:

You are taking the position that the church has not tried to hide aspects of its history?  Ever?

Yes.

24 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Elder Snow acknowledged that the church has done exactly that. 

Did he? Let's see what Elder Snow actually said, according to the source being quoted:

"I think in the past there was a tendency to keep a lot of the records closed or at least not give access to information."

Elder Snow - and any honest critic of the Church, if such there be - would probably also say that most large organisations have tended to keep most of their records "closed or at least not give access to information" most of the time. If I don't show you my bank statements, it's not because I'm "hiding" any "aspects," but because such things are routinely regarded as confidential, and nobody else's business.

The expected anti-Mormon spin that this amounts to an admission of "hiding" something is, of course, false.

But don't let that slow you down.

24 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Packer and Oaks have both told CES that they shouldn’t share everything. 

Yes, and once again the anti-Mormons have had a field day with that, but it doesn't mean what they (I'm being kind with that pronoun) would so dearly love to think it means. It's simply the rule that, in any teaching situation, teachers select the material that is most relevant to the class and most valuable for teaching.

But hey - go ahead and pretend that it's an admission of some sinister conspiracy. You know you want to.

24 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Ballard’s “gone are the days” quote to CES, while not totally clear, certainly had that connotation. 

No. It does not.

  • Like 1
Link to post
7 minutes ago, kiwi57 said:

Why should we set aside the deliberately manipulative and inflammatory rhetoric? It shows how the anti-Mormon propagandists who produced this hate spiel are trying to influence opinion. As such, it is relevant.

"Apart from the inflammatory rhetoric" seems to be the equivalent of, "Sure, someone just knocked out all 32 of your teeth, rhetorically speaking, but, trust him, he's still interested in good-faith dialogue with you, in not poisoning the well, stacking the deck, et cetera."  

Rhetoric matters.  Motives matter.  Not automatically imputing bad faith to one's interlocutor(s) matters. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
8 minutes ago, kiwi57 said:

Having read the article: it is a nasty piece of trash.

If it makes any good points, they are lost in the spite.

No wonder the usual suspects are gushing over it.

They call out two apostles for false statements.  That is probably hard for many members to swallow, and a tendency is to shoot the messenger. But the message is very clear, it is in black and white.  What Ballard and Oaks said was just untrue.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Fair Dinkum
      While I'll assume no one in this board is unfamiliar with this subject, I'll still offer a short synopsis just in case. Back Story:  In 1985 the family of B.H. Roberts allowed a collection of his personal papers, still in the private hands of family members, to be published into book form.  The collection was published as "Studies of The Book of Mormon"
      In his papers were discovered notes of a special meeting that was held in early 1922 involving all member's of the First Presidency, The Quorum of the Twelve as well as the 7 Presidents of the Seventy, of which Robert's was a member.  Robert's had been given the assignment by Heber J. Grant to answer questions that had been sent in a letter to the church from a member seeking answers. 
      The questions were quite straight forward:
      when the Jews landed in the New World (600 B.C.) is not enough time to explain the diversity of native Indian languages. Horses were introduced to the Americas by the Spaniards, thus their appearance in the Book of Mormon is an anachronisms. The use of steel in the Book of Mormon is an anachronism. The use of scimitars (an arabian sword) in an anachronism. The use of silk was unknown to the Americas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studies_of_the_Book_of_Mormon
      Roberts concerns went unanswered by church authorities which caused him to try and resolve the difficulties himself.  The book represents his attempt to resolve those questions, he was unsuccessful in doing so. 
      Now a new master thesis has been written exploring secret meetings that took place following Robert's failed attempt to find satisfaction from his fellow church authorities.  Robert's formed this band of LDS intelligentsia in a further attempt to resolve his concerns and find answers to Book of Mormon problems.  While I've only just started to read it, this thesis is a fascinating behind the scenes look into the pre-correlation church.
      https://scholarworks.unr.edu/handle/11714/6712
      Despite his failures to resolve his concerns, we owe much to Roberts attempt, for it was from many of these questions that much of today's apologetic theories of a limited footprint, duel Cumorah's and acknowledgement of a pre-populated Asian immigrant America, to name just a few, have emerged.  Since the emergence of the internet, modern day apologetics has completely re-framed how the Book of Mormon is viewed from how it was interpreted in 1922. The problem is that much of the church still views the book in much the same way as it was seen in 1922.
      Mormon historians have debated whether the manuscript/book reflects Roberts's doubts or was a case of his playing a devils advocate. One interesting fact remains, per his instructions, his headstone has a Christian Cross on it, which was even unusual for that time and even more so for a former General Authority of the Church.
       
    • By blueglass
      Here is the 2019 end of year seminary assessment my kids received yesterday. Would love to hear your thoughts on the questions, the probable answers, and the doctrine taught.  Don't forget the last 4 questions pertaining to the Explain Doctrine section.  
      https://ibb.co/Dfz4JNr
      Read instructions before you start the test:
      Exam code: 8
      If you have difficulty taking the learning assessment in the traditional way, please talk with your teacher to figure out the best way to help you succeed.
      Use a no. 2 or HB pencil. Indicate your response by completely filling in the bubble on your answer sheet.
      Section name: Multiple Choice
        1.  Who will receive a place in a kingdom of glory? (1 mark)
      a) Every individual born into mortality
      b) All of God's children except the sons of perdition
      c) Only individuals who are worthy of exaltation
        2. Which of the following is a specific responsibility mentioned in the oath and covenant of the priesthood? (1 mar)
      a) To magnify their callings
      b) To pay a generous fast offering
      c) To not be idle
        3. Because of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, in the Resurrection all individuals will receive ____ (1 mark)
      a) at least a terrestrial glory
      b) celestial glory
      c) glory according to the law they obeyed
        4. Which of the following blessings does God offer to those who keep the Word of Wisdom? (1 mark)
      a) They will not be burned at the Second Coming.
      b) Their bodies will be protected from all illness.
      c) They will receive wisdom and great treasures of knowledge.
        5. To be endowed in the temple means to receive ____ (1 mark)
      a) a guarantee of eternal life
      b) spiritual power and knowledge
      c) unique physical gifts from the Lord
        6. What does the existence of the precious truths in the Pearl of Great Pric teach us about the Prophet Joseph Smith? (1 mark)
      a) He no longer needed the power of God to help him translate.
      b) He was a prophet, seer, and revelator.
      c) He is the only prophet of this dispensation that can receive new scripture.
        7. As watchmen on the tower, modern prophets have a responsibility to ____ (1 mark)
      a) warn us of coming dangers
      b) stop Satan from tempting members of the Church
      c) change truth to fit modern times
        8. What is a bishop's or branch president's main responsibility when a teenager confesses sin to him? (1 mark)
      a) To prevent the person from being part of the Church
      b) To help the person receive forgiveness of the sins and regain peace of mind
      c) To inflict severe consequences and punishments from sinning
        9. Who visited the Prophet Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in the Kirtland Temple to restore priesthood keys? (1 mark)
      a) Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Malachi
      b) Moses, Elias, and Elijah
      c) Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
        10. According to the Doctrine and Covenants, what are tithing funds used for? (1 mark)
      a) They are the main fund the Church uses to support the poor and the needy.
      b) They are used to build temples and to accomplish the work of the Lord.
      c) They are used to pay ward and branch members for serving in the Church.
        11. While the Prophet Joseph Smith was falsely imprisoned in Liberty Jail, the Lord taught him that adversity and affliction
      (1 mark)
      a) will not occur if we trust in God
      b) are always a consequence of our poor choices
      c) can give us experience and be for our good
        12. Which of the following is a true statement about Relief Society? (1 mark)
      a) It was divinely organized to assist in the work of salvation.
      b) It was established during the trek west to help Saints who were suffering.
      c) It did not exist during the lifetime of the Prophet Joseph Smith.
        13. A man and a woman will receive eternal life and glory if _____ (1 mark)
      a) they love each other more than they love themselves
      b) they keep the new and everlasting covenant of marriage they made in the temple
      c) they are married in the temple
        14. Why do our ancestors who die without having a knowledge of the gospel need us to perform ordinances for them in the temple?
      a) Without these ordinances, our ancestors cannot progress toward eternal life. (1 mark)
      b) Without these ordinances, our ancestors cannot be saved in any kingdom of glory.
      c} Without these ordinances, our ancestors will not be resurrected.
        15. Marriage between one man and one woman is the Lord's standing law. Wen is the only time plural marriage is justified?
      a) Wen there are more women than men in the Church (1 mark)
      b) Whenever local laws and traditions allow members to practice it without breaking the law
      c) When the Lord authorizes it through the priesthood keys given to the President of the Church
        16. When the President of the Church dies, which quorum becomes the presiding quorum of the Church? (1 mark)
      a) The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles
      b) The Quorum of the First Presidency
      c) The Presiding Bishopric
        17. Which of the following shows the correct chronological order (first to last) of places the Saints were told to gather to? (1 mark}
      a) A stake in their homeland; Nauvoo, Illinois; Winter Quarters, Nebraska; Salt Lake City, Utah
      b) Nauvoo, Illinois; Winter Quarters, Nebraska; Salt Lake City, Utah; a stake in their homeland
      c) Winter Quarters, Nebraska; Nauvoo, Illinois; Salt Lake City, Utah; a stake in their homeland
        18. After the Savior visited the spirit world, what did righteous spirits there begin to do?
      a} They were all resurrected and began entering the highest kingdom of glory.
      b) They began performing ordinances for those who had not received them.
      c) They began teaching the gospel to those in spirit prison.
      (1 mark)
        19. According to Official Declaration 2, the Lord revealed that all worthy male Church members may ___ _ (1 mark)
      a) receive the ordinance of baptism
      b) serve a mission at age 18
      c) receive the priesthood and enjoy temple blessings
        20. What principle is emphasized in Doctrine and Covenants 121:36, 41-2? (1 mark)
      a) Priesthood holders can draw upon the powers of heaven only if they live righteously.
      b) lf we actively seek to learn through study and faith, our faith in Jesus Christ will increase.
      c) If we obey the Lord, He will always keep His promises to bless us.
        21. Which of the following accurately describes Heavenly Father? (1 mark)
      a) He is without feelings or emotions.
      b) He is a personage of Spirit and can dwell in us.
      c) He has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's.
        22. Which of the following is a requirement for receiving exaltation in the celestial kingdom? (1 mark)
      a) Bearing testimony of the Savior is all that is needed.
      b) Receiving a patriarchal blessing
      c) Receiving and being valiant in the testimony of Jesus Christ
        23. Of the following groups, who will inherit the celestial kingdom? (1 mark)
      a) All children who die before they reach the age of accountability
      b) All members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
      c) All individuals who have been baptized
        24. Which eternal truth corrects the following worldly philosophy: "God doesn't care how marriage is defined"? (1 mark)
      a) Ever individual born into morality is a child of God, and God loves each of us.
      b) Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God.
      c) God changes truth to meet the circumstances and needs of His children.
        25. Which eternal truth corrects the following worldly philosophy: "It isn't as important for couples to have children today as it used to
      a) Marriage between a man and a woman is the ideal setting for children to be born, reared, and nurtured.
      b) God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between a man and a woman who are
      lawfully wedded as husband and wife.
      c) God's commandment fr husbands and wives to have children remains in force today.
        26. Which eternal truth corrects the following worldly philosophy: "As long as two individuals love each other, physical intimacy is
      acceptable"? (1 mark)
      a) Marriage between a man and a woman is the ideal setting for children to be born, reared, and nurtured.
      b) Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God.
      c) God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between a man and a woman who are
      lawfully wedded as husband and wife.
        27. Which eternal truth corrects the following worldly philosophy: "As governments continue to redefine marriage, God's definition of
      marriage will change to reflect the values of modern society"? (1 mark)
      a) Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God.
      b) God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between a man and a woman who are
      lawfully wedded as husband and wife.
      c) Changes in the civil law do not change the moral law that God has established.
        28. Which eternal truth corrects the following worldly philosophy: "The only purpose of marriage is for adults to find fulfillment and
      happiness"? (1 mark)
      a) Marriage between a man and a woman is the ideal setting for children to be born, reared, and nurtured.
      b) Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God.
      c) God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between a man and a woman who are
      lawfully wedded as husband and wife.
      Section name: Explain Doctrine _
      Instructions: Write your answer on a piece of paper. Compare your response with the correct answer received from your teacher. After self-grading the explain-doctrine question, bubble in your answer sheet.
      Self-grade your answer for each question:
      a. Yes, I explained this in my response.
      b. No, I left this out of my response.
        29. What is an example of a truth that was restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith? Explain why the truth you chose can help you receive eternal life. (1 mark)
        30. What is an example of an ordinance that was restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith? Explain why the ordinance you chose can help you receive eternal life. (1 mark)
        31. What is an example of priesthood authority that was restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith? Explain why this authority of the priesthood can help you receive eternal life. (1 mark)
        32. Share your personal thoughts on the importance of the Prophet Joseph Smith. (1 mark)
    • By blueglass
      Really impressed with Kate Holbrook's interview with Terryl Givens.  She's thoughtful, candid, and inspiring as she speaks about her persistence to get a PhD and work full time for the church as a manger of church history.  She's working on a project with Lisa Tate on the history of the young women's organization.  
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2G7k1ggz7k&feature=em-uploademail
      One thing I caught that I hadn't heard before was when Terryl asks her about whether she felt a sense of loss and a sense of jubilation when studying the history of the RS.  Joseph envisioned a more collaborative relationship with the male priesthood, more autonomy, abundance of spiritual gifts, authority to administer ordinances including healing by the laying of hands.  Kate responds that she understands the hyperfocus on this time period, but she feels there is a lost opportunity in recognizing the accomplishments of the women of the 20th century - she then backtracks a bit and says:
      "I don't want to say that their isn't a difference, between - a time when a woman was able to say I have this terrific idea she's say the General RS president and she goes and talks to the president of the church about it.  That is certainly different than now, when she goes and talks to someone in the presiding bishopric, and it has to go through several levels to even get to the president.  There is a loss, and there is a difference."
      I had no idea that the General RS president did not have direct access to the quorum of the 12, and first presidency?  Why in 3 heavens does the general RS president still have such an auxiliary level of access to the presiding apostolic quorum, access to financial influence through Pres Bishopric perhaps, but no real budget to work with?  No seat on the correlation committee?  
      Kate has a great story about how Ardeth Greene Kapp (General YW president 84-92') while receiving a downpour of revelation would use innovative, clever ways and technology to push the ideas upward through the hierarchy.  
    • By FearlessFixxer
      Greetings.

      I was told by a friend that I needed to check this site out and I am super impressed!  I love the commentary, both for and against, the various leaks we have have over the last year.
       
      This is by far the best forum currently discussing the leaks.
       
      Anyway, I thought I would offer myself up to you all and do an AMA (Ask Me Anything).
       
      No questions are off the table, but I reserve the right to say no comment 
       
      If you need proof that this is really me you can PM me at https://www.facebook.com/FearlessFixxer
       
      Cheers
       
      Moderator advice: Welcome to the board, feel free to join in but we do not allow personal ads. 
    • By rockpond
      For anyone out there who has been dying to know how much a temple employee makes <crickets>, some 2006 data is now available!
      MormonLeaks has also created a page where they are compiling all leaks that have to do with church salaries, it's here:
      https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/index.php?title=Mormon_Church_Salaries
      If you were looking to become employed with the church, it appears that (as of 2006) the top salaries there maxed out around $130k.  Likely a bit higher now.
×
×
  • Create New...