Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Brad Wilcox fireside to Alpine youth on Feb 6.


Recommended Posts

This just came across my Facebook feed.  Can anyone give me some more insight?  This clip seems very embarrassing when the Church is making statement against racism.  Do you think the youth are swayed by this?

What about the second one one?

And the rest of the clips show a talk going on in the same manner.  Do you think this is the message our Church leaders want going out?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, kimpearson said:

This clip seems very embarrassing when the Church is making statement against racism.  Do you think the youth are swayed by this?

The first clip reminds me of things I've heard my former housemate from Sierra Leone say in response to people's questions. In short, all disciples have to trust God's timing.

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
Link to comment

I haven't reviewed the whole talk, so please take this with a grain of salt.  His comments about the priesthood ban are off putting.  Especially since the church has already answered this question in the essays. I wish people would inform themselves of the essays before giving these types of talks.

There is a lot of discussion going on right now on reddit, and apparently John Dehlin has just posted a podcast concerning Brad Wilcox's presentation.  I wasn't planning on listening, but this fireside has generated a lot of interest.

Link to comment

You can find the whole fireside on Youtube.  Just search Brad Wilcox alpine youth conference.  I have now listened to the whole fireside.  I would love to hear the sisters in this group thoughts on Brad's explanation of why women aren't ordained to the priesthood and why women don't hold priesthood keys.  I would like to hear from those that left the Church and feel like they have lost everything as Brad states will happen if you leave the Church.  I would like to hear your thoughts on Brad stating that everyone else in the world is just "playing at religion".  Your thoughts on what he has to say about feeling the Spirit and having the Gift of the Holy Ghost.  Your thoughts on Brad's repeated threats to the youth that they will lose everything if they leave the Church.   Brad also states that no more people are leaving the Church now than have ever left the church in the past.  He states they are just louder.

There is just an incredible number of statements made by Brad that I just don't see as the way the leaders of the Church want to encourage youth to stay in the Church.  Love to hear all of your thoughts.

I have not listened to John Dehlin's comments on the fireside nor do I intend too.  I would hope that we could just discuss the actual fireside remarks.

Link to comment

Brad just shared this on Facebook.

 

 
My dear friends, I made a serious mistake last night, and I am truly sorry. The illustration I attempted to use about the timing of the revelation on the priesthood for Black members was wrong. I've reviewed what I said and I recognize that what I hoped to express about trusting God's timing did NOT come through as I intended. To those I offended, especially my dear Black friends, I offer my sincere apologies, and ask for your forgiveness. I am committed to do better.
 
 

 

 
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, kimpearson said:

Brad just shared this on Facebook.

 

 
My dear friends, I made a serious mistake last night, and I am truly sorry. The illustration I attempted to use about the timing of the revelation on the priesthood for Black members was wrong. I've reviewed what I said and I recognize that what I hoped to express about trusting God's timing did NOT come through as I intended. To those I offended, especially my dear Black friends, I offer my sincere apologies, and ask for your forgiveness. I am committed to do better.
 
 
 

 

 

Props to him for this.  I would like to officially walk back my last post.

Edited by sunstoned
Link to comment

Here is the link to the whole talk. Hope it works: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ykj6r4g21hllhl9/Alpine Tri-stkae regional fireside webinar - correct2.mp4?dl=0

I'm listening to the talk right now. So far I'm  suffering through flashbacks to being an EFY counselor as he plugs FSY really, really hard. Even timeshare people are like dude, we get it. I never went as a kid because it was expensive and my parents thought it was for troubled youth which I wasn't. My time as a councilor was awful. It seemed like a decent way to make some summer money. But I've never been around a group of more judgmental people and sunshine police than other EFY councilors. I'm a giant dork and a nice guy, and I felt like the hard core rebel among that group. Excuse me while I have a Pepsi and listen to Metallica on my lunch break. 

Super early first impressions (but no worse than the first impressions I'm seeing around the web), it doesn't sound like he teaching anything out of the ordinary, except some really bad sound bites as he explains those ordinary things. Ironically, that isn't too different from Brigham Young who was good as a controversial quote machine. 

At the 27 minute mark he called someone that didn't believe in Joseph Smith stupid. He was often very dismissive of those with criticisms. Maybe this in your face style works with some, but it turns me off. He tries really hard to be funny at times, and he is not. At the 44 minute mark he is making a female desiring the priesthood sound shrill and calls her shallow and loud. Stuff like that is painful. At times I got the impression he was trying too hard to be John Bytheway. 

Diminishing people as playing church as you teach important things about authority and the priesthood is really condescending and something that I learned the hard way to avoid as a missionary. Its disappointing to see a general authority do it. His last point was E for everyone, which seems incongruous compared to his tone towards critics and those that are "playing church." "I like being part of the solution." Said completely unironically at the 50 minute mark. 

The stuff about the priesthood and blacks does seem pretty bad. I'm not an expert on racial stuff so I'm willing to listen to more. I don't understand how questioning the timing, 1829 vs. 1978 is supposed to be a defense. Out of context, the questions about the priesthood timing see really sophistic. Ewww, then he did the creepy Biden whisper at the 39 minute mark. 

Asking about the timing of something is sometimes useful. For example, Sinologists often roll their eyes when scholars are shocked at the first time an Asian power beat a Western one (in the Russian Japanese War of 1905). That popular perception isn't even correct as China fought and won skirmishes against Russia in Illi province during the late 19th century (as I describe in my book https://www.amazon.com/Decisive-Battles-Chinese-History-Morgan-ebook/dp/B07G3D6NN3#:~:text=Decisive Battles in Chinese History by Morgan Deane overcomes these,major Japanese operations in China. )  But no one ever marvels that the first European power to beat a East Asian one was only 50 years prior in the 1843 Opium War. Turning the dates around in that instance is a good way of seeing how Western centric history can be sometimes.

But in the case of Wilcox, I don't know understand the point he is trying to make. The context makes his point sound a bit better. He talked about the length of time it took gentiles to get the priesthood compared to the Levites and so on. But it still doesn't sound good. Something stronger would have been to acknowledge the racism of Brigham Young, and society in general during that period and how hard it was to change, but lets be grateful we have. Again, I'm not an expert on that stuff, but that would have sounded better I think.  

While the doctrines are fine, his bad sound bites sound really bad. I've seen this before when members are defending the general conference talks of church leaders. But if you're speaking for the church, particularly in general conference, maybe you'd take some extra time to think about the implications of your talk. Have some wisdom and insight for how your words come across to others, those who are struggling, those who want to leave but try to stay, those who aren't members, those who suffer from mental illness and scrupulosity and so on. Wilcox doesn't do that. 

In the time it took me to write this I almost finished his talk. I think the church will have to clarify some of those bad sound bites, because they are really bad on their own. They are slightly better in context, but not much. And listening to the whole talk presented other issues that aren't in the sound bites. His dismissive tone of critics and painful antics don't seem appropriate. (Though at least he is trying to be interesting, instead of the slow old man cadence we get at  conference so there is that). But you should be interesting from a combination of knowledge and public speaking skills. Brad Wilcox wasn't. (And he asked about refreshments on fast sunday at the end....OOF!) 

Hope the links help. Looking forward to other comments and insights. 


 

Link to comment

If this was a general conference talk I'd be more concerned. It's not though. It's someone who isn't an apostle or seventy, giving an unscripted and unvetted fireside to a specific group of youth. He's already apologised for the race comments so clearly he's aware the point he was trying to make didn't come across correctly.

I see it as just yet another example of a person or people with an axe to grind against the church recording and releasing something that wasn't intended to be widely distributed. Because let's face it, if this had been a perfectly normal boring fireside, I doubt many people outside of alpine would know the contents of the fireside.

Edited by JustAnAustralian
Link to comment
3 hours ago, morgan.deane said:

I'm listening to the talk right now.

Thank you for the summary. Will listen to it later myself as going back to sleep hopefully shortly. 
 

Good for him apologizing after admitting he made a mistake.  And to those critics who are willing to not dismiss or ignore that he did so.

 

 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment

A lot of Brad anecdotes for dealing with troublesome church issues tend to be true, but not useful. I find that those who never struggled with the difficult topics offer some of the worst insight for them.

All that being said, aside from his remarks on race and the priesthood and attempts to explain away difficult issues, it was a fine talk. 

Link to comment

I went and listened to the part of the talk in which he discusses priesthood.  It’s not a new argument he makes.  He brings up the Levites and the Gentiles having to wait.  These are old points that have been made many times.  
 
It’s not what I would say, but I don’t see a need to make a huge fuss.  It just shows how easy it is to get attacked by the outrage mob these days.  

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Calm said:

Ach…couldn’t resist just to dip in 

I really dislike his characterization of other churches “playing at church” because they lack the authority and how the wedding vow for time and eternity felt wrong to him.

 

Not sure Wilcox comments help move fwd the gospel message.  I want to send my daughter to the FSY camp this year but I want her to share truth without belittling the faith of others.  In Mark 9:38-41 "whoever is not against us is for us".

Link to comment

Sistas in Zion said it better than I ever could: 

Can somebody at the NAACP please call me? I know The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said we in a relationship with y’all now, and I’m tryna find out what the status is. Like, do we go together or are we just the side chick that think they the main chick? I’m asking cause it’s Black History Month and this what yo girlfriend out here doing. 

Saints, which one of y’all is asking Bro. Wilcox about the pre-1978 discrimination policy against Black members of the church? In the words of Uchtdof, “stop it.” 

What is, “being grateful down to your socks?” 

The moral of the story, I don’t see where or how our relationship with the NAACP is rubbing off on the church if this is how we’re engaging with racial issues in 2022. 

The moral of the moment, be grateful that “the Blacks” got sat in the back of the priesthood bus.

#FixItJesus,
Zandra

Ps: The brother in the blue mask is my face the entire time.

Full fireside: https://youtu.be/HbO3gVVVy5g

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, Peacefully said:

Sistas in Zion said it better than I ever could: 

Can somebody at the NAACP please call me? I know The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said we in a relationship with y’all now, and I’m tryna find out what the status is. Like, do we go together or are we just the side chick that think they the main chick? I’m asking cause it’s Black History Month and this what yo girlfriend out here doing. 

Saints, which one of y’all is asking Bro. Wilcox about the pre-1978 discrimination policy against Black members of the church? In the words of Uchtdof, “stop it.” 

What is, “being grateful down to your socks?” 

The moral of the story, I don’t see where or how our relationship with the NAACP is rubbing off on the church if this is how we’re engaging with racial issues in 2022. 

The moral of the moment, be grateful that “the Blacks” got sat in the back of the priesthood bus.

#FixItJesus,
Zandra

Ps: The brother in the blue mask is my face the entire time.

Full fireside: https://youtu.be/HbO3gVVVy5g

For sure. And the tone throughout when saying other faiths just play church. And so many other things sadly. Hopefully it's a wake up call for all. But I do think he was more trying to get on the youths' level. But it was more like a comedy act in his efforts. We do all make dumb moves though. And he was good enough to apologise.

Link to comment
10 hours ago, morgan.deane said:

Here is the link to the whole talk. Hope it works: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ykj6r4g21hllhl9/Alpine Tri-stkae regional fireside webinar - correct2.mp4?dl=0

I'm listening to the talk right now. So far I'm  suffering through flashbacks to being an EFY counselor as he plugs FSY really, really hard. Even timeshare people are like dude, we get it. I never went as a kid because it was expensive and my parents thought it was for troubled youth which I wasn't. My time as a councilor was awful. It seemed like a decent way to make some summer money. But I've never been around a group of more judgmental people and sunshine police than other EFY councilors. I'm a giant dork and a nice guy, and I felt like the hard core rebel among that group. Excuse me while I have a Pepsi and listen to Metallica on my lunch break. 

Super early first impressions (but no worse than the first impressions I'm seeing around the web), it doesn't sound like he teaching anything out of the ordinary, except some really bad sound bites as he explains those ordinary things. Ironically, that isn't too different from Brigham Young who was good as a controversial quote machine. 

At the 27 minute mark he called someone that didn't believe in Joseph Smith stupid. He was often very dismissive of those with criticisms. Maybe this in your face style works with some, but it turns me off. He tries really hard to be funny at times, and he is not. At the 44 minute mark he is making a female desiring the priesthood sound shrill and calls her shallow and loud. Stuff like that is painful. At times I got the impression he was trying too hard to be John Bytheway. 

Diminishing people as playing church as you teach important things about authority and the priesthood is really condescending and something that I learned the hard way to avoid as a missionary. Its disappointing to see a general authority do it. His last point was E for everyone, which seems incongruous compared to his tone towards critics and those that are "playing church." "I like being part of the solution." Said completely unironically at the 50 minute mark. 

The stuff about the priesthood and blacks does seem pretty bad. I'm not an expert on racial stuff so I'm willing to listen to more. I don't understand how questioning the timing, 1829 vs. 1978 is supposed to be a defense. Out of context, the questions about the priesthood timing see really sophistic. Ewww, then he did the creepy Biden whisper at the 39 minute mark. 

Asking about the timing of something is sometimes useful. For example, Sinologists often roll their eyes when scholars are shocked at the first time an Asian power beat a Western one (in the Russian Japanese War of 1905). That popular perception isn't even correct as China fought and won skirmishes against Russia in Illi province during the late 19th century (as I describe in my book https://www.amazon.com/Decisive-Battles-Chinese-History-Morgan-ebook/dp/B07G3D6NN3#:~:text=Decisive Battles in Chinese History by Morgan Deane overcomes these,major Japanese operations in China. )  But no one ever marvels that the first European power to beat a East Asian one was only 50 years prior in the 1843 Opium War. Turning the dates around in that instance is a good way of seeing how Western centric history can be sometimes.

But in the case of Wilcox, I don't know understand the point he is trying to make. The context makes his point sound a bit better. He talked about the length of time it took gentiles to get the priesthood compared to the Levites and so on. But it still doesn't sound good. Something stronger would have been to acknowledge the racism of Brigham Young, and society in general during that period and how hard it was to change, but lets be grateful we have. Again, I'm not an expert on that stuff, but that would have sounded better I think.  

While the doctrines are fine, his bad sound bites sound really bad. I've seen this before when members are defending the general conference talks of church leaders. But if you're speaking for the church, particularly in general conference, maybe you'd take some extra time to think about the implications of your talk. Have some wisdom and insight for how your words come across to others, those who are struggling, those who want to leave but try to stay, those who aren't members, those who suffer from mental illness and scrupulosity and so on. Wilcox doesn't do that. 

In the time it took me to write this I almost finished his talk. I think the church will have to clarify some of those bad sound bites, because they are really bad on their own. They are slightly better in context, but not much. And listening to the whole talk presented other issues that aren't in the sound bites. His dismissive tone of critics and painful antics don't seem appropriate. (Though at least he is trying to be interesting, instead of the slow old man cadence we get at  conference so there is that). But you should be interesting from a combination of knowledge and public speaking skills. Brad Wilcox wasn't. (And he asked about refreshments on fast sunday at the end....OOF!) 

Hope the links help. Looking forward to other comments and insights. 


 

Brad Wilcox’s talk was not flawless, and the portion about the priesthood ban was ill considered, as he himself has acknowledged. But the hysterical pearl clutching from the likes of Dehlin signals to me that he is not altogether off the mark with the talk taken as a whole. 
 

Bu the way, he’s not a General Authority. Members of the Young Men general presidency are not General Authorities. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
7 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

For sure. And the tone throughout when saying other faiths just play church. And so many other things sadly. Hopefully it's a wake up call for all. But I do think he was more trying to get on the youths' level. But it was more like a comedy act in his efforts. We do all make dumb moves though. And he was good enough to apologise.

Absolutely! And I am grateful that my dumb moves were not on video. I hope his apology is sincere and he does better in the future. 

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...