General Conference Predictions and Rumors

[Calm]

1 minute ago, mnn727 said:

A Bud-Light baseball cap?

A "Make the Church Great Again" hat? 

[Boanerges]

On 9/24/2021 at 7:04 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

Why is an apology even in order? The speaker at the graduation commencement was given free rein to speak his mind. The risk of having his remarks open to criticism is the price he paid for that privilege. Would he or his supporters prefer that his speech had been censored in the first place?

 

There are many points of view on this and many other topics. Your perspective is one way to look at it and I respect that. In the end we are on the same page because neither of us are expecting an apology and thus neither of us will be disappointed.

[bluebell]

53 minutes ago, amo said:

 

The calling of Ward Young Men president may be reinstated.

 

Amo

I wish this would happen.  It's been a bit of a mess trying to have the bishopric in charge of this along with everything else they are doing.

[Ginger Snaps]

5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I wish this would happen.  It's been a bit of a mess trying to have the bishopric in charge of this along with everything else they are doing.

Me too. My husband was serving as a Bishop when this change was made and he never really did find his feet with it before he was released. And he was stressed about trying to be equitable with his time between the YW and the YM. I feel like there was nowhere near enough guidance on that issue, and in fact a lot of ignoring the fact that the YW are part of “the youth”. 

Edited September 27, 2021 by Ginger Snaps

[Chum]

1 hour ago, mnn727 said:

A "Make the Church Great Again" hat? 

This has so much possibility.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Ginger Snaps said:

Me too. My husband was serving as a Bishop when this change was made and he never really did find his feet with it before he was released. And he was stressed about trying to be equitable with his time between the YW and the YM. I feel like there was nowhere near enough guidance on that issue, and in fact a lot of ignoring the fact that the YW are part of “the youth”. 

My husband is in the Bishopric and trying to spend time with the YW has been a HUGE issue for them as well. 

[rongo]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

I wish this would happen.  It's been a bit of a mess trying to have the bishopric in charge of this along with everything else they are doing.

 

1 hour ago, Ginger Snaps said:

Me too. My husband was serving as a Bishop when this change was made and he never really did find his feet with it before he was released. And he was stressed about trying to be equitable with his time between the YW and the YM. I feel like there was nowhere near enough guidance on that issue, and in fact a lot of ignoring the fact that the YW are part of “the youth”. 

 

26 minutes ago, bluebell said:

My husband is in the Bishopric and trying to spend time with the YW has been a HUGE issue for them as well. 

This is actually a pretty likely one, but maybe not this conference. It wouldn't surprise me at all if it happened this soo. I think the bishopric as young men's presidency has been disastrous, and has put inordinate stress on bishoprics. There aren't many feelings worse than the feeling that you are neglecting important things, and it's not really neglect. And, the bishopric is still over most things, even in wards that heavily delegate to the RS and EQ. I think there is a lot of guilt about people not visited/met with, etc. even though they are trying. 

I think that the more back-and-forth there is with changes, like a pendulum, the more of a sign it is that they are looking for the solution, but don't know what it is. 20 years ago, there was a whiplash change within a year that put the bishops focusing solely on the youth, and then shifting from this to being hands-on over the ward mission (and leaving the youth largely to the YM/YW organizations). I was a ward mission leader and an EQP when these changes happened, and it was breathtaking how fast and soon the "drop everything and do this" shifted to "disregard! Drop everything and do that!" 

I also think things ran better, overall, with separate HP groups and elders quorums, but the Covid era straddles that change, so it's hard to tell what the causes actually were. Actual levels of "ministering" are abysmal, except probably in Indonesia (hat tip: @Hamba Tuhan  ). I was just called into a new EQ presidency, and enthusiasm, commitment, and morale are very low. It's hard even getting the "same ten people." I don't think undoing any of President Nelson's big initiatives will happen for a long while, though. 

Edited September 27, 2021 by rongo

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, rongo said:

 

 

This is actually a pretty likely one, but maybe not this conference. It wouldn't surprise me at all if it happened this soo. I think the bishopric as young men's presidency has been disastrous, and has put inordinate stress on bishoprics. There aren't many feelings worse than the feeling that you are neglecting important things, and it's not really neglect. And, the bishopric is still over most things, even in wards that heavily delegate to the RS and EQ. I think there is a lot of guilt about people not visited/met with, etc. even though they are trying. 

I think that the more back-and-forth there is with changes, like a pendulum, the more of a sign it is that they are looking for the solution, but don't know what it is. 20 years ago, there was a whiplash change within a year that put the bishops focusing solely on the youth, and then shifting from this to being hands-on over the ward mission (and leaving the youth largely to the YM/YW organizations). I was a ward mission leader and an EQP when these changes happened, and it was breathtaking how fast and soon the "drop everything and do this" shifted to "disregard! Drop everything and do that!" 

I also think things ran better, overall, with separate HP groups and elders quorums, but the Covid era straddles that change, so it's hard to tell what had the causes were. Actual levels of "ministering" are abysmal, except probably in Indonesia (hat tip: @Hamba Tuhan  ). I was just called into a new EQ presidency, and enthusiasm, commitment, and morale are very low. It's hard even getting the "same ten people." I don't think undoing any of President Nelson's big initiatives will happen for a long while, though. 

I understand why they made the change to Bishopric as YM presidency.  In some ways it doesn't make sense to have someone without keys "presiding" over those in the organization who do have keys.  

But yes, it just seems like too much.  I think the YW are losing out in the end, because how can the de facto YMs presidency possibly devote as much time to the YW as they do the YM?  It's just not possible.

The youth is such a huge calling that I don't know how it can work when the presidency of one of the organizations has an even huger calling they are also trying to do at the same time.

[rongo]

My feeling that this is imminent is not very high (I think it's very unlikely), but for a speculative thread, what the heck:

Canonization of the Proclamation as Official Declaration #3.

---

I think the Brethren are divided on this, and that fear of future disavowal leads to hesitancy. It's a lot harder to disavow, and say, "forget all we've said . . . we acted with limited light . . . now there is a flood of new light" when you are eliminating a section of the D&C or the PoGP. Canonization would in essence be burning the ships on the shore.

---

As I've said, I expect a vanilla, garden variety, quiet and uneventful conference with no blockbuster changes or announcements. 

[rongo]

Just now, bluebell said:

I understand why they made the change to Bishopric as YM presidency.  In some ways it doesn't make sense to have someone without keys "presiding" over those in the organization who do have keys.  

But yes, it just seems like too much.  I think the YW are losing out in the end, because how can the de facto YMs presidency possibly devote as much time to the YW as they do the YM?  It's just not possible.

The youth is such a huge calling that I don't know how it can work when the presidency of one of the organizations has an even huger calling they are also trying to do at the same time.

I think the bigger consideration was dramatically reducing the number of men/priesthood holders needed to staff a ward or branch. I think the exact same consideration went into consolidating the MP quorums, and rolling ward mission leader into the EQP. 

The bishopric always "presided" over YM, even when YMP were called to run the day-to-day details. They always were in quorum meetings (unless visiting YW classes). This put a lot of stress for the week-in-week-out planning and execution of activities on the bishoprics. 

[esodije]

On 9/25/2021 at 3:21 PM, JustAnAustralian said:

A lot of stuff is already given in leadership training about those kinds of things, so I could see it making it to the wider audience.

Yes, but it sounds like they’re serious this time.

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

I wish this would happen.  It's been a bit of a mess trying to have the bishopric in charge of this along with everything else they are doing.

Not sure that’s the case everywhere. The bishop’s counselor in our ward in charge of it, along with the rest of the bishopric, seems to be doing a good job. We had a bang-up youth conference this year, and there have been meaningful weekly activities notwithstanding the pandemic. 
 

We don’t have a huge number of young men in our ward right now, though. 

[bluebell]

10 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Not sure that’s the case everywhere. The bishop’s counselor in our ward in charge of it, along with the rest of the bishopric, seems to be doing a good job. We had a bang-up youth conference this year, and there have been meaningful weekly activities notwithstanding the pandemic. 
 

We don’t have a huge number of young men in our ward right now, though. 

I'm sure it's not.

We've been having weekly activities for over a year now, and have had all of the regular youth conference/high adventure type of stuff as well.  Our bishopric is doing everything that was being done before the change, it's just really hard on them.  When I served in YWs the bishopric were often at our sunday lessons and wednesday night activities.  The new bishopric (called right when these changes happened) struggle to hang out with the YW once a month now.  They essentially have two huge callings each and it's difficult to meet all the needs.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

23 hours ago, rongo said:

My feeling that this is imminent is not very high (I think it's very unlikely), but for a speculative thread, what the heck:

Canonization of the Proclamation as Official Declaration #3.

---

I think the Brethren are divided on this, and that fear of future disavowal leads to hesitancy. It's a lot harder to disavow, and say, "forget all we've said . . . we acted with limited light . . . now there is a flood of new light" when you are eliminating a section of the D&C or the PoGP. Canonization would in essence be burning the ships on the shore.

---

As I've said, I expect a vanilla, garden variety, quiet and uneventful conference with no blockbuster changes or announcements. 

Is there a realistic expectation that it will ever be disavowed, though? Not from my perspective. There might be some wishful thinking in some quarters, but that’s what I see as unrealistic. 
 

I don’t expect the proclamation will be canonized, but my reason is that it really didn’t plow any new ground. All it did was reaffirm existing doctrines and principles that were long had among the Latter-day Saints and that I expect will be in place into the eternities. 
 

How many other such proclamations or declarations have been canonized over the years? The doctrinal exposition on the Father and the Son comes to mind. It brought some important clarity in our understanding of Deity, but it was never canonized. 
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2002/04/the-father-and-the-son

 

Edited September 28, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[Boanerges]

20 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

How many other such proclamations or declarations have been canonized over the years? The doctrinal exposition on the Father and the Son comes to mind. It brought some important clarity in our understanding of Deity, but it was never canonized. 

Two come to mind off the top of my head - OD1 and OD2.

[Scott Lloyd]

22 hours ago, Boanerges said:

Two come to mind off the top of my head - OD1 and OD2.

There are a number of others that haven’t been canonized — which was my point. These two are only a fraction of the total. 
 

And unlike these two, the family proclamation did not alter the state of affairs in the Church, also my point. 
 

Rather, the family proclamation sets forth for the public at large (and, as needed, some members within the Church) what is, has been and always will be the doctrine and position of the Church with regard to the family. 

Edited September 28, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[strappinglad]

On 9/24/2021 at 9:59 PM, The Nehor said:

born with a silver spoon in their mouths.

I don't know about a silver spoon , but I knew there was a ' wooden spoon ' waiting if I misbehaved. 

[Ipod Touch]

I predict that the office of Church Patriarch will be reintroduced. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

5 hours ago, rongo said:

This put a lot of stress for the week-in-week-out planning and execution of activities on the bishoprics. 

The people who should be doing the week-in-week-out planning and execution of activities are the quorum presidencies -- aided and assisted by their quorum advisers. This has always been the case. In the old Handbook, it stated that a bishop was to call an adviser to the teachers quorum, who would also serve as first counsellor in the YM presidency, and an adviser to the deacons quorum, who would also serve as the second counsellor in the YM presidency. The adviser in the bishop's own quorum, of course, was then the YM president. For decades, Church leaders have begged us to take quorum presidencies seriously, but too often men in YM presidencies treated the quorums as their personal domains, so we kept the advisers but stopped calling them a presidency in order to try to clarify their roles. If bishoprics are drowning, it's because they don't understand how any of this actually works. Outside of removing one of the titles of the quorum advisers, literally nothing has changed.

[rongo]

13 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

The people who should be doing the week-in-week-out planning and execution of activities are the quorum presidencies -- aided and assisted by their quorum advisers. This has always been the case. In the old Handbook, it stated that a bishop was to call an adviser to the teachers quorum, who would also serve as first counsellor in the YM presidency, and an adviser to the deacons quorum, who would also serve as the second counsellor in the YM presidency. The adviser in the bishop's own quorum, of course, was then the YM president. For decades, Church leaders have begged us to take quorum presidencies seriously, but too often men in YM presidencies treated the quorums as their personal domains, so we kept the advisers but stopped calling them a presidency in order to try to clarify their roles. If bishoprics are drowning, it's because they don't understand how any of this actually works. Outside of removing one of the titles of the quorum advisers, literally nothing has changed.

That sounds good on paper, but in reality, "shadow leadership" and "let them lead," and "let them fail so they can learn to succeed" has been disastrous. I know, I know --- Indonesia has been a veritable paradise for baptisms, retention, YSA activity, boys serving missions, etc., but this is not the reality almost anywhere else. 

Without strong adult leadership showing boys well-planned and well-run activities, waves of young men have grown up with lame, boring, flailing activities under the "let them lead" regime. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

40 minutes ago, rongo said:

Without strong adult leadership showing boys well-planned and well-run activities, waves of young men have grown up with lame, boring, flailing activities under the "let them lead" regime. 

I.e., 'Don't you dare touch my sacred cow false tradition of the fathers!'

I was trained as a newly called YM president in 2006 (and not in Indonesia!) by a counsellor in the Young Men General Presidency. He said your attitude was the single greatest source of failure in our Aaronic Priesthood quorums and the experiences boys should be having therein.

I've posted repeatedly about what happened in our ward when I finally got a bishop a few months later who agreed that we would do as trained: We went from three boys active at church to dozens. We went from one boy regularly attending mid-week activities to between 40 and 50 (including non-member friends, one of whom was baptised). Our teachers quorum was functioning so well that Bishop assigned them to provide the temporal welfare to a sister whose husband was on an overseas posting and whose new-born had had brain surgery; they did so brilliantly for six months until he returned.

And then something else happened. For the first time in nearly two decades, one of our Young Men chose to serve a fulltime mission. And then another. And then another, followed by more. This past Sunday, we got a returned mission report from that first boy's youngest sister. Every one of his siblings has now served. His parents weren't even active when he left and in fact had opposed his decision. They're active now, and his mum is RS president in their ward. This wasn't the only family to return to activity because of the influence of their sons, whom we trained and supported to be the actual leaders and key-holders of their quorums.

And do you know how many of the Young Men whom we helped train up and who went on to serve missions came home early from their missions? That's right. Exactly zero. And do you know how many are active now? That's right. 100 per cent.

By the way, when I was trained, I was told that we could judge if we were succeeding in helping boys become the actual leaders of their quorums by a single metric: they would faithfully complete missions.

As you can tell, I'm not taking your BS. You whinge endlessly in this forum about how the young men of today are coddled and weak and incapable of serving challenging missions, and then you turn around and defy the prophets of God when they tell you what one of the main causes is and what the fix is. I find it disgusting.

And I feel sorry for your elders quorum. I have zero hope that their 'enthusiasm, commitment, and morale' are going to improve under the leadership of someone who is clearly invested in doing everything he can to undermine and gainsay current prophetic directions in order to demonstrate that he's smarter than Pres Nelson and his 'big initiatives'.

Edited September 28, 2021 by Hamba Tuhan

[MustardSeed]

I predict a non political non controversial old school safe conference. 

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

If bishoprics are drowning, it's because they don't understand how any of this actually works. 

This is not always true.  I know that each of the quorums in our YMs has an advisor and multiple specialists. In one quorum the adult leaders outnumber the young men.  But the adult leaders hardly ever show up or do their calling, leaving the bulk of the responsibility upon the bishopric.

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I.e., 'Don't you dare touch my sacred cow false tradition of the fathers!'

I was trained as a newly called YM president in 2006 (and not in Indonesia!) by a counsellor in the Young Men General Presidency. He said your attitude was the single greatest source of failure in our Aaronic Priesthood quorums and the experiences boys should be having therein.

I've posted repeatedly about what happened in our ward when I finally got a bishop a few months later who agreed that we would do as trained: We went from three boys active at church to dozens. We went from one boy regularly attending mid-week activities to between 40 and 50 (including non-member friends, one of whom was baptised). Our teachers quorum was functioning so well that Bishop assigned them to provide the temporal welfare to a sister whose husband was on an overseas posting and whose new-born had had brain surgery; they did so brilliantly for six months until he returned.

And then something else happened. For the first time in nearly two decades, one of our Young Men chose to serve a fulltime mission. And then another. And then another, followed by more. This past Sunday, we got a returned mission report from that first boy's youngest sister. Every one of his siblings has now served. His parents weren't even active when he left and in fact had opposed his decision. They're active now, and his mum is RS president in their ward. This wasn't the only family to return to activity because of the influence of their sons, whom we trained and supported to be the actual leaders and key-holders of their quorums.

And do you know how many of the Young Men whom we helped train up and who went on to serve missions came home early from their missions? That's right. Exactly zero. And do you know how many are active now? That's right. 100 per cent.

By the way, when I was trained, I was told that we could judge if we were succeeding in helping boys become the actual leaders of their quorums by a single metric: they would faithfully complete missions.

As you can tell, I'm not taking your BS. You whinge endlessly in this forum about how the young men of today are coddled and weak and incapable of serving challenging missions, and then you turn around and defy the prophets of God when they tell you what one of the main causes is and what the fix is. I find it disgusting.

And I feel sorry for your elders quorum. I have zero hope that their 'enthusiasm, commitment, and morale' are going to improve under the leadership of someone who is clearly invested in doing everything he can to undermine and gainsay current prophetic directions in order to demonstrate that he's smarter than Pres Nelson and his 'big initiatives'.

We had a YMs leader who tried to do as you've suggested.  He was adamant about it (and he was such a good man and very devoted to that calling).  It was a disaster.  The YM never followed through with what they had planned, activities were always a disaster (as the YW president, it was horrible when the YM were in charge of our combined activities as nothing would be planned or executed), and the YM stopped coming.  Agency means that sometimes things don't work out the way we want them to.  

And that last two paragraphs were really snarky.  I hope you are doing ok.  Your tone on here lately has been increasingly contentious and judgmental and not at all in the spirit that I'm used to reading from you.

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

The adult leaders hardly ever show up or do their calling, leaving the bulk of the responsibility upon the bishopric.

First of all, they aren't adult leaders; they're advisers. That's part of what we're trying to fix with these adjustments. (Personal anecdote: when I was serving as YM president, our ward's music director asked me if the Young Men would prepare a musical item for sacrament meeting. I told her I didn't know, but she could ask their leaders. That generated a blank stare, followed by a discussion about who the three quorum presidents were. She had no clue. And all three of them, after consulting with each other, declined the invitation.)

Second, they need to be called to repentance, trained better, and/or released and replaced. I suspect many of them just don't grasp the true nature of their callings.

Third, functioning quorum presidencies can basically operate without adult advisers and really only need bishopric members to sign off on decisions. It takes some time to get there. But like everything else, it's worth the initial investment, and then it's self-perpetuating. A new deacon who enters a quorum with a functioning presidency learns how to be a deacons quorum president almost by osmosis.

Edited September 28, 2021 by Hamba Tuhan