Hype for April 2019 Conference

[HappyJackWagon]

31 minutes ago, Navidad said:

If I remember correctly, one of the only General Conference talks to be stricken completely from the conference record was by Elder Richards in 1932. It was a fascinating talk about the word of wisdom. I think it was Heber J Grant that ordered its removal from the conference record. Somewhere here I have a copy of that record and sure enough, the talk never happened! It is floating around on the internet now. Read it; it is a great talk!

Though the talk wasn't published by the church (stricken from the record), it was published in Sunstone Magazine. https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/015-43-46.pdf

ETA- Interesting quote from the talk.

Quote

I do not mean to say that I doubt the wisdom of the Word

of Wisdom. I know that it contains God's wishes and

direction for the welfare of His children, and I am sure that

those who fail to heed the teaching of it will lose blessings of

great worth, but I am not sure that we have not estranged

many from the Church or at least contributed to their

estragement by attributing to violation of our standards of

health, harmful as it may be, a moral turpitude and sinful

magnitude out of proportion of the real seriousness of the

offense.

This is good stuff.

Quote

I have said these things because I fear dictatorial dogmatism,

rigidity of procedure and intolerance even more than1

fear cigarettes, cards, and other devices the adversary may

use to nullify faith and kill religion. Fanaticism and bigotry

have been the deadly enemies of true religion in the long

past. They have made it forbidding, shut it up in cold grey

walls of monastery and nunnery, out of the sunlight and

fragrance of the growing world. They have garbed it in

black and then in white, when in truth it is neither black nor

white, any more than life is black or white, for religion is life

abundant, glowing life, with all its shades, colors and hues,

as the children of men reflect in the patterns of their lives

the radiance of the Holy Spirit in varying degrees.

 

Edited March 5, 2019 by HappyJackWagon

[Navidad]

5 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Though the talk wasn't published by the church (stricken from the record), it was published in Sunstone Magazine. https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/015-43-46.pdf

 

Thanks. I knew I had it somewhere. Thanks also for the link. 

[ALarson]

27 minutes ago, Navidad said:

If I remember correctly, one of the only General Conference talks to be stricken completely from the conference record was by Elder Richards in 1932. It was a fascinating talk about the word of wisdom. I think it was Heber J Grant that ordered its removal from the conference record. Somewhere here I have a copy of that record and sure enough, the talk never happened! It is floating around on the internet now. Read it; it is a great talk!

I have never read it....but I will now!  Thanks  (And thanks also HJW for posting a link to it....)

[ALarson]

25 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Though the talk wasn't published by the church (stricken from the record), it was published in Sunstone Magazine. https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/015-43-46.pdf

"Stricken"?  Wow.  Any idea why?

[bluebell]

10 minutes ago, ALarson said:

"Stricken"?  Wow.  Any idea why?

This specific talk was talked about in a recent slc tribune article (that was linked here as well).  Here's the relevant quote-

In April 1932, apostle Stephen L Richards gave a conference address titled “Bringing Humanity to the Gospel.”

“I fear dictatorial dogmatism, rigidity of procedure and intolerance even more than I fear cigarettes, cards and other devices the adversary may use to nullify faith and kill religion,” Richard declared to the Latter-day Saint faithful. “Fanaticism and bigotry have been the deadly enemies of true religion in the long past. … They have garbed it in black and then in white, when in truth it is neither black nor white, any more than life is black or white, for religion is life abundant, glowing life, with all its shades, colors and hues, as the children of men reflect in the patterns of their lives the radiance of the Holy Spirit in varying degrees.”

Church President Heber J. Grant began getting complaints about the speech from members around the country, but Richards said he would rather resign than change his words.

Grant told his colleagues that “it would have been very difficult to print Richards’ address since the text would need to be accompanied by a statement, which would call more attention to the talk,” Geisner writes. “Grant decided to ‘let the matter drop, and if it doesn’t appear in the conference pamphlet, it will soon be forgotten.’”

 

 

[Navidad]

56 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Though the talk wasn't published by the church (stricken from the record), it was published in Sunstone Magazine. https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/015-43-46.pdf

ETA- Interesting quote from the talk.

This is good stuff.

 

Marvelous talk. Also interesting bit of LDS trivia. Also a lot of truth to it!

[MustardSeed]

As faithful member, I appreciate this talk.  

I value flexibility and out of the box thinking, even when I am feeling safer inside the rules. 

[Scott Lloyd]

20 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

I don’t disagree.   I bet a lot of people would be disoriented by such a thing. 

Remember when coke was newly sold on campus? How many under 40 were affected? Not nearly as big a deal but I certainly know people who have never drank caffeine at all.  I’m sure that change was alarming for some. 

Incidentally, would you be comfortable sharing here what you would be tickled to get a pass on? I showed you mine. I don’t think mine was terribly shameful, incidentally. 

Fasting once a month. I’ve always found that difficult. 

I don’t disbelieve in the principle or advocate against it. I just have a hard time living it. 

[Navidad]

One other interesting thing about Elder Richards (I am a church history buff so I think a lot of things are interesting that probably aren't!). His full name was Stephen L Richards. His middle name was actually "L"     I don't know the story behind it, but it is properly written without the period (.) behind the L because L was the full extent of his middle name. And now you know the rest of the story! 

[pogi]

3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Though the talk wasn't published by the church (stricken from the record), it was published in Sunstone Magazine. https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/015-43-46.pdf

ETA- Interesting quote from the talk.

This is good stuff.

 

One of the better talks have read from past conferences!  Thanks for posting the link.

It should also be noted that Elder Richards was made President Richards (first counselor in the first presidency) after giving this talk, so the fact that his talk was not printed should not be construed as disapproval of him or his message.  It should be noted, however, that it was not stricken because it taught some false doctrine or principle, but because it was largely misunderstood (as Elder Richards feared it would be).  Instead of accompanying an explanatory statement with the talk, they thought it would be easier to just not print it to avoid misunderstanding...unfortunate.  The good news is that by doing so, it will likely receive FAR more attention today than it otherwise would have.  It is an extremely timely talk, filled with spirit and wisdom!

Here are some more snippets of his talk I found poignant:

Quote

Ridicule and ostracism often amount to compulsion. I deplore their existence. I fear arrogant dogmatism. It is a tyrant guilty of more havoc to human-kind than the despot ruling over many kingdoms. I have pity for the disobedient, not hatred. They deprive themselves of blessings. The disobedient punish themselves

That is some wisdom all of us on these forums should consider as we interact with people from different backgrounds and experience on these forums.

I found this bit very timely with all the changes that are happening today (thinking of JLHPROF )

Quote

Another aspect of the changing process that must necessarily go forward in a live, vital institution such as the Church is, relates to the modification of forms and procedure. We do not have a great gody [I have no idea what that means] of set forms and rituals, I am glad to say. The very elasticity of prayers, ceremonies, and procedure is additional evidence to me of the adaptability of our religion to human needs, and therefore of its divinity. Some important changes have been made in recent years. In some instances they have considerably disturbed some members of the Church. I am sure that the concern and alarm so created have been unwarranted. The critics have failed to recall that the items which have been modified were originally interpreted and adapted by good men occupying the same ecclesiastical positions and endowed with the same power as the good men now occupying these positions. Personally, I highly approve of the changes that have been made, and I hope and believe that the presiding authority will be led to make other changes along various lines that will advance the cause we represent. I am not afraid of change: it is the mother of growth. 

 

Edited March 5, 2019 by pogi

[MustardSeed]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Fasting once a month. I’ve always found that difficult. 

I don’t disbelieve in the principle or advocate against it. I just have a hard time living it. 

Oh my, me too.  

[rockpond]

On 3/4/2019 at 12:04 PM, Navidad said:

I am a bit confused. If revelation to the leaders is the direct voice (word) of God, then what difference would the age, life experience, or personal beliefs of the one receiving the revelation make? Just how involved is the one receiving the message in its interpretation and dissemination to the folks?

Don't we believe that Joseph Smith's age, experience, and beliefs played into the revelation that he sought and received?

It seems that one's circumstances have much to do with both the questions one asks of the Lord and ones receptivity to the answers.

We have also been taught that the will of the Lord is recognized by the FP and Q12 when they reach consensus on a particular matter.

[Hamba Tuhan]

5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Fasting once a month. I’ve always found that difficult. 

I used to feel that way. Then, when I was serving as YM president, I was once sitting in the temple, praying for my boys, many of whom were struggling.

In prayer, I asked, 'What more can I do for them? I would do anything', I added.

'Hamba, you could fast for them'.

'I already fast for them. Every single month'.

'You could fast for them every week'.

'Wait, what? Fasting nearly kills me as it is'.

'Didn't you just say that you'd do anything?'

So I started fasting every single week. I was released 6.5 years ago, and I still haven't stopped. I've learnt to delight in fasting. And though I have added many reasons to fast, I'm still fasting for my boys, one of whom has invited himself over tonight for tea and a chat. He's just started uni, and he's struggling. But we'll get through this.
 

[Hamba Tuhan]

On 3/5/2019 at 1:08 PM, MustardSeed said:

Incidentally, would you be comfortable sharing here what you would be tickled to get a pass on? I showed you mine. I don’t think mine was terribly shameful, incidentally. 

You didn't ask me, but I've been thinking about this, and I've only been able to come up with one thing: early morning seminary. I'd love to see a more workable replacement.

I'd also love to stop having stake presidency meeting at 6am every Sunday, but that's a local choice and one I seem incapable of shifting.

[Calm]

12 hours ago, ALarson said:

Yes, I'd agree and that is acceptance and change in the church (regarding sexual revolution).  So, it's not a huge leap to believe there could be more acceptance and change regarding same-sex relationships (with the same moral guidelines as heterosexual relationships and marriages).  I actually believe that will happen.  Maybe not with the leaders we now have, but when the younger generations are the leaders.

Two issues changed out of ? (And they relating to direct, clear cut health issues...physical burden on mother potentially leading early death is addressed by both though not only reason) in terms of what is now allowed makes it possible, but not probable in my view since the majority have no movement on them.

[Calm]

13 hours ago, Prof said:

When I was a kid, cola was forbidden! Period! That was understood by everyone in the ward!

Where did you live and when?  Me, 60s-80s in California and Illinois, I was taught it was a choice.  We always got coke when vomiting (maybe why I prefer Pepsi, lol).  And the reason we didn't get it otherwise was the caffeine was seen as bad for health generally, not part of the WoW (sleep disorders is part of my family history going back generations on both sides).  Mom paid attention to health info.  She made everything from scratch except the occasional cake mix.  

Edit:  saw answer was given...

Edited March 6, 2019 by Calm

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

Two issues changed out of ?

You just can't restrain the ebullient hope of a 'progressive Mormon' who has convinced her-/himself that the Church's long-awaited reform is imminent.

[JulieM]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Two issues changed out of ? 

It’s still change.  No one can deny there’s been changes and that there will be more. What those will be?  I don’t know, but there will be more changes coming from our leaders.  Do you disagree?

I know many who are excited about this and can’t wait for conference to hear what President Nelson will be doing next.  I hear so many talk about this now.

Edited March 6, 2019 by JulieM

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, JulieM said:

It’s still change.  No one can deny there’s been changes and that there will be more. What those will be?  I don’t know, but there will be more changes coming from our leaders.  Do you disagree?

Well, my scale shows a drop of three pounds without me trying in two days, so I can take that to mean I  will be 50 lbs lighter in 3 months or I can look at it as perhaps a response to something very specific (was watching something particularly  interesting in the middle of the night and couldn't be bothered to get up and get something to eat at my usual hunger time) and therefore not a general precursor.

I could point to the changes in portraying modesty in the past 60 years (no more sleeveless, shorts and skirts longer or even no shorts or capris allowed at activities) and therefore predict based on that change, that more rigid, limited definitions of morality are on the horizon,

I don't see any truly fundamental changes over issues of defined immorality besides no longer interpreting abortion and birth control as not automatically immoral (both can be viewed as immoral still if used for selfish reasons or to be able to participate in immoral situations without fear of pregnancy complications) and I haven't seen those budge for over 40 years, iirc.

Edited March 6, 2019 by Calm

[JulieM]

Of course I see your point, Calm.  But I think there’s been some pretty big changes (along with small ones) over the years.  There will be more and we’ll just have to wait and see what those will be.  

[Scott Lloyd]

6 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I used to feel that way. Then, when I was serving as YM president, I was once sitting in the temple, praying for my boys, many of whom were struggling.

In prayer, I asked, 'What more can I do for them? I would do anything', I added.

'Hamba, you could fast for them'.

'I already fast for them. Every single month'.

'You could fast for them every week'.

'Wait, what? Fasting nearly kills me as it is'.

'Didn't you just say that you'd do anything?'

So I started fasting every single week. I was released 6.5 years ago, and I still haven't stopped. I've learnt to delight in fasting. And though I have added many reasons to fast, I'm still fasting for my boys, one of whom has invited himself over tonight for tea and a chat. He's just started uni, and he's struggling. But we'll get through this.
 

Thank you for that insight. I pray that I will have a similar one one day. 

On an intellectual level, if not quite a spiritual level, I can see how fasting could be an instrument for deliverance, in which case I think I too might come to view it as a delight. 

[reubendunn1]

On 12/10/2018 at 3:55 PM, rockpond said:

We could certainly use more clarity on our teachings regarding gender.  That would be nice.

One would have thought that the Proclomation on the Family provided the “clarity” on gender.

[Kenngo1969]

15 hours ago, Navidad said:

One other interesting thing about Elder Richards (I am a church history buff so I think a lot of things are interesting that probably aren't!). His full name was Stephen L Richards. His middle name was actually "L"     I don't know the story behind it, but it is properly written without the period (.) behind the L because L was the full extent of his middle name. And now you know the rest of the story! 

I actually know the story behind that.  His mother wanted to give him cover in case he, notwithstanding his saintly nature, was overcome with the urge to swear.  "Oh, L!"   I had an Advanced Placement English teacher in high school who used to sing, "Oh, Hel, oh, Hel, oh Helen I love you!"

[Kenngo1969]

26 minutes ago, reubendunn1 said:

One would have thought that the Proclomation on the Family provided the “clarity” on gender.

For some, it does.

[rockpond]

10 hours ago, Calm said:

Where did you live and when?  Me, 60s-80s in California and Illinois, I was taught it was a choice.  We always got coke when vomiting (maybe why I prefer Pepsi, lol).  And the reason we didn't get it otherwise was the caffeine was seen as bad for health generally, not part of the WoW (sleep disorders is part of my family history going back generations on both sides).  Mom paid attention to health info.  She made everything from scratch except the occasional cake mix.  

Edit:  saw answer was given...

When I was in middle school (Phoenix, not the Mormon-dense area of Mesa/Gilbert) I confessed to my Bishop that I drank Pepsi when it was offered to me.  His response:  If someone offered you a beer, would you drink that?  In consequence, I swore off caffeinated drinks.  Until my mission... it was in my first area, probably on my first day -- lunch at an investigator's house: She served us Pepsi with lunch (I find it funny that it was Pepsi again as I am now a Diet Coke drinker).  At first I declined but my trainer indicated that I should accept it.  He later explained that the water from their home would not have been good to drink and that it was okay if I drank caffeinated beverages.