Family proclamation founded on irrevocable doctrine: President Oaks

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Mark, I'm crushed by your lack of reading comprehension. I can't tell if it's wilful or if you're just so deeply embedded in the discourse that you can't see out of it. 

That's disappointing!

Please explain how I misunderstood this passage. 

Brandon Ambrosino, 'The Invention of "Heterosexuality"', BBC, 16 Mar. 2017.

I am at a loss to explain how I got it so wrong.

It appears to me that this is precisely what I also said

"Sex has no history,” writes queer theorist David Halperin at the University of Michigan, because it’s “grounded in the functioning of the body.” Sexuality, on the other hand, precisely because it’s a “cultural production,” does have a history. In other words, while sex is something that appears hardwired into most species, the naming and categorising of those acts, and those who practise those acts, is a historical phenomenon, and can and should be studied as such.

Or put another way: there have always been sexual instincts throughout the animal world (sex). But at a specific point in time, humans attached meaning to these instincts (sexuality). When humans talk about heterosexuality, we’re talking about the second thing."

"Sex", like death, has no history because it is based in a biological event.

Sex and death are biologically based, yet when we attach human significance to them, we have a basis for a date when they became a human construction, or a "history".

I don't want to debate or argue with you, but PLEASE show me where I am going wrong.

And for me that idea goes back to William James in the late 19th century, right on schedule!

To me, this is part of virtually every aspect of how I view reality, and why for me, this is a yawner; I have lived this concept now since at least 1966.  It's like breathing to me!

 

Edited April 7, 2022 by mfbukowski

[CV75]

9 hours ago, california boy said:

I am not getting how any of this relates to what I posted.  I don’t think anyone is saying that man/woman marriages aren’t PART of the plan.  

The part that my post relates to is the false concept "that the Celestial Kingdom is ONLY for God's straight children." Man/woman marriages are not dependent upon sexual orientation, i.e., "gay" / "straight", which I am correcting (yes, I understand it is not your idea, and terms like "heterosexual marriage" and "homosexual marriage" ignore the fact that the covenant is gender-based, not sexuality-based). The celestial kingdom is for all God's children who would truly enjoy living there under the laws and terms of that kingdom. Man/woman marriages are part of the plan, but even more so, essential to the plan since that is how Jesus, the Epicenter of the plan, executed the plan. Hence the "essential characteristics" of gender, not sexuality.

 

[Bernard Gui]

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I had the same experience with Nibley:  One of my roommates and I went to Smith Fieldhouse to hear Nibley lecture on the Dead Sea Scrolls, about which I knew nothing.  I understood nothing Nibley said.  However, my roommate had recorded it, and so I listened to it again:  And again I came up with nothing.  About 8 years later, I began to get it.  It definitely took time and a lot of study.

Yep.

[sunstoned]

8 hours ago, bluebell said:

Very true.  Some believe that JS was a prophet but erred in regards to polygamy.

My Bishop believed this.  He was the first one that I knew of who thought this way.  He brought it up in priesthood meeting.  Since then, I have found that many members believe this.

[Scott Lloyd]

On 4/5/2022 at 9:13 PM, bluebell said:

Yes, thank you for providing that.  I mostly just wanted to see if Oaks stated the FoP was founded on unchangeable doctrine or if that was a paraphrase.  I need to go over the other parts that you've posted to see if he mentioned what the unchangeable doctrine is specifically or if he means ideas of eternal gender and marriage being between a man and woman in general.

I’m not clear from this what it is you are trying to ascertain, but at any rate, the conference talks verbatim texts are now accessible at the Church’s website and on the Gospel Library app, so you and others are now free to explore President Oaks’s talk in its entirety (though I don’t hold out any great hope that many here will choose to do so). 
 

Here it is:

 

Divine Love in the Father’s Plan
By President Dallin H. Oaks
First Counselor in the First Presidency

The purpose of the doctrine and policies of this restored Church is to prepare God’s children for salvation in the celestial kingdom and for exaltation in its highest degree.

The gospel plan shows our Heavenly Father’s love for all His children. To understand this, we must seek to understand His plan and His commandments. He loves His children so much that He gave His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to be our Savior and Redeemer, to suffer and die for us. In the restored Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we have a unique understanding of our Heavenly Father’s plan. This gives us a different way of viewing the purpose of mortal life, the divine judgment that follows it, and the ultimate glorious destiny of all of God’s children.
I love you, my brothers and sisters. I love all of God’s children. When Jesus was asked, “Which is the great commandment in the law?” He taught that to love God and to love our neighbors are the first of God’s great commandments. Those commands are first because they invite us to grow spiritually by seeking to imitate God’s love for us. I wish we all had a better understanding of the loving doctrine and policies that our Heavenly Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, have established in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. What I say here seeks to clarify how God’s love explains that doctrine and the Church’s inspired policies.

I.

A common misunderstanding of the judgment that ultimately follows mortal life is that good people go to a place called heaven and bad people go to an everlasting place called hell. This erroneous assumption of only two ultimate destinations implies that those who cannot keep all the commandments required for heaven will necessarily be forever destined for hell.
A loving Heavenly Father has a better plan for His children. The revealed doctrine of the restored Church of Jesus Christ teaches that all the children of God—with exceptions too limited to consider here—will finally wind up in a kingdom of glory. “In my Father’s house are many mansions,” Jesus taught. From modern revelation we know that those mansions are in three different kingdoms of glory. In the Final Judgment each of us will be judged according to our deeds and the desires of our hearts. Before that, we will need to suffer for our unrepented sins. The scriptures are clear on that. Then our righteous Judge will grant us residence in one of those kingdoms of glory. Thus, as we know from modern revelation, all “shall be judged … , and every man shall receive according to his own works, his own dominion, in the mansions which are prepared.”
The Lord has chosen to reveal comparatively little about two of these kingdoms of glory. In contrast, the Lord has revealed much about the highest kingdom of glory, which the Bible describes as the “glory of the sun.”
In the “celestial” glory there are three degrees, or levels. The highest of these is exaltation in the celestial kingdom, wherein we may become like our Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. To help us develop the godly attributes and the change in nature necessary to realize our divine potential, the Lord has revealed doctrine and established commandments based on eternal law. This is what we teach in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints because the purpose of the doctrine and policies of this restored Church is to prepare God’s children for salvation in the celestial glory and, more particularly, for exaltation in its highest degree.
The covenants made and the blessings promised to the faithful in the temples of God are the key. This explains our worldwide building of temples, about which the choir has sung so beautifully. Some are puzzled at this emphasis, not understanding that the covenants and ordinances of the temple guide us toward achieving exaltation. This can be understood only in the context of the revealed truth of three degrees of glory. Because of our Heavenly Father’s great love for all of His children, He has provided other kingdoms of glory—as Elder Quentin L. Cook explained yesterday—all of which are more wonderful than we can comprehend.
The Atonement of Jesus Christ makes all of this possible. He has revealed that He “glorifies the Father, and saves all the works of his hands.” That salvation is granted in different kingdoms of glory. We know from modern revelation that “all kingdoms have a law given.” Significantly:
“He who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory.
“And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory.
“And he who cannot abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory.”
In other words, the kingdom of glory we receive in the Final Judgment is determined by the laws we choose to abide by in our Heavenly Father’s loving plan. Under that plan there are multiple kingdoms so that all of His children can be assigned to a kingdom where they can “abide.”

II.

The teachings and policies of the Lord’s restored Church apply these eternal truths in a way that can be fully understood only in the context of our Heavenly Father’s loving plan for all of His children.
Thus, we honor individual agency. Most are aware of this Church’s great efforts to promote religious freedom. These efforts are in furtherance of our Heavenly Father’s plan. We seek to help all of His children—not just our own members—enjoy the precious freedom to choose.
Similarly, we are sometimes asked why we send missionaries to so many nations, even among Christian populations. We are also asked why we give enormous humanitarian aid to persons who are not members of our Church without linking this to our missionary efforts. We do this because the Lord has taught us to esteem all of His children as our brothers and sisters, and we want to share our spiritual and temporal abundance with everyone.
Eternal doctrine also provides a distinctive perspective on children. Through this perspective we see the bearing and nurturing of children as part of the divine plan. It is a joyful and sacred duty of those given the power to participate in it. Therefore, we are commanded to teach and contend for principles and practices that provide the best conditions for the development and happiness of children under God’s plan.

III.

Finally, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is properly known as a family-centered Church. But not well understood is the reality that our family-centeredness is not limited to mortal relationships. Eternal relationships are also fundamental to our theology. The mission of the restored Church is to help all the children of God qualify for what God desires as their ultimate destiny. By the redemption provided through the Atonement of Christ, all may attain eternal life (exaltation in the celestial kingdom), which Mother Eve declared “God giveth unto all the obedient.” This is more than salvation. President Russell M. Nelson has reminded us that “in God’s eternal plan, salvation is an individual matter; [but] exaltation is a family matter.”
Fundamental to us is God’s revelation that exaltation can be attained only through faithfulness to the covenants of an eternal marriage between a man and a woman. That divine doctrine is why we teach that “gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.”
That is also why the Lord has required His restored Church to oppose social and legal pressures to retreat from His doctrine of marriage between a man and a woman, to oppose changes that homogenize the differences between men and women or confuse or alter gender.
The restored Church’s positions on these fundamentals frequently provoke opposition. We understand that. Our Heavenly Father’s plan allows for “opposition in all things,” and Satan’s most strenuous opposition is directed at whatever is most important to that plan. Consequently, he seeks to oppose progress toward exaltation by distorting marriage, discouraging childbearing, or confusing gender. However, we know that in the long run, the divine purpose and plan of our loving Heavenly Father will not be changed. Personal circumstances may change, and God’s plan assures that in the long run, the faithful who keep their covenants will have the opportunity to qualify for every promised blessing.
A uniquely valuable teaching to help us prepare for eternal life, “the greatest of all the gifts of God,” is the 1995 proclamation on the family. Its declarations are, of course, different from some current laws, practices, and advocacy, such as cohabitation and same-sex marriage. Those who do not fully understand the Father’s loving plan for His children may consider this family proclamation no more than a changeable statement of policy. In contrast, we affirm that the family proclamation, founded on irrevocable doctrine, defines the kind of family relationships where the most important part of our eternal development can occur.
That is the context for the unique doctrine and policies of the restored Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

IV.

In many relationships and circumstances in mortal life, each of us must live with differences. As followers of Christ who should love our fellow men, we should live peacefully with those who do not believe as we do. We are all children of a loving Heavenly Father. For all of us, He has destined life after death and, ultimately, a kingdom of glory. God desires all of us to strive for His highest possible blessings by keeping His highest commandments, covenants, and ordinances, all of which culminate in His holy temples being built throughout the world. We must seek to share these truths of eternity with others. But with the love we owe to all of our neighbors, we always accept their decisions. As a Book of Mormon prophet taught, we must press forward, having “a love of God and of all men.”
As President Russell M. Nelson declared in our last conference: “There has never been a time in the history of the world when knowledge of our Savior is more personally vital and relevant to every human soul. … The pure doctrine of Christ is powerful. It changes the life of everyone who understands it and seeks to implement it in his or her life.”

May we all implement that sacred doctrine in our own lives, I pray in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Edited April 7, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

11 hours ago, Orthodox Christian said:

Thanks Bluebell, that was really helpful.

If you want to learn ‘pure’ Latter-day Saint doctrine as opposed to all the variations of interpretations and acceptance and rejection that you will get by asking individuals what the faith’s beliefs/doctrines are, the best (though not perfect) place to explore that is the Church’s website.  Even though it is also produced by humans and therefore includes variations of beliefs, unlike this board the intent of that website is to produce the most consistent and precise information following direction from leaders.  This process is called “correlation” (you might see posters referring to correlation sometimes and they mean Correlation, which is an official system of harmonizing, simplifying, and removing inappropriate elements in published church materials that started iirc in the 60’s and is overseen by church leadership in Salt Lake…edited:  I am wrong, the correlation program started much early, I wasn’t thinking of the larger aspects of it, this appears a good overview https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priesthood_Correlation_Program ) and there are people and leaders called to try and ensure the best possible explanations without inserting too much personal interpretation into it.  Of course it is still personal interpretation since it is human language where they pick and choose what words and stories they think best fit the need/meaning, but because it gets overseen by multiple people, not just editors in many cases, but ultimately overseen by those who have authority to determine doctrine, it comes closest to our ‘pure doctrine’ (not saying apostles who determine our doctrine read and approve everything that gets printed, but they appoint those who oversee the operation and part of choosing them would be the understanding the supervisors are decent at explaining actual doctrine without including personal additions to fill in gaps and such).  Stuff does slip through though…but much less than anywhere else you might look for answers imo.

Best place to find our basic doctrine is in the Gospel Principles manual.

https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-principles?

if that doesn’t work, try copy/pasting this:  www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/Gospel-principles?lang=eng 

The website is a total glitch for me now, I see the page for a second and then it disappears leaving just header and footer; don’t know if it is something wrong at my end or theirs

Best place to get basic faithful info on some of the controversial topics are the Gospel Topics essays.  The Gospel Topics section is a good place to find basic info on beliefs and the ‘mainstream’ Latter-day Saint interpretation.

https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/essays?

The links are not “below” but at the side when you click on the little book icon to the left, basically brings up a table of contents.  Polygamy is under Plural Marriage, which is the name given to the form of polygyny practiced in the Church in the past that is believed to be commanded by the Lord.

 This is not to say that if we disagree with some interpretations (such as what the Adam and Eve story is), we will be seen as apostates or heretical in some of the doctrine (though some of the more traditional saints who are rigid in their views might see us that way).  In our faith there are actually very few doctrines we have to believe and often it is more our orthopraxy that determines whether or not we are judged faithful by our leaders for the things that need their judgment (baptism, ability to enter the temple, callings to teach).  The baptism questions and temple recommend questions are the best lists of “necessary beliefs and behaviours of a faithful Latter-day Saint.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/shared/content/images/gospel-library/manual/34594/34594_000_014_02-covenants.pdf (pardon the child version, the website is glitching and the one I wanted keeps blanking out)

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/temples/what-is-temple-endowment?lang=eng  Covenants are listed towards the bottom

Faithful believers can believe that much of the stories in the scripture are symbolic or related to past temple rites or are myths (not in the pejorative sense) that may have historical aspects or are literal, historical stories.  Traditionally the last is the most common position.  While we are not Protestant, most of our early converts were and they brought into the Church many of the attitudes and beliefs they previously held.  Baptism may wash us clean of our sins, but it doesn’t wash us clean of our ideas, leaving us a blank slate to start completely fresh.  
 

Nor do we have a systematic theology that tries to provide a complete picture, explaining all things in the context of the faith.  The gospel provides us with a very strong foundation and internal structure to build on, but we may bring a variety of bricks, windows, trim, flooring, paint, furniture, etc to create the home of belief we live in…and many of us are constantly renovating.  There are those who are minimalists and others who get into classic traditional styles…some of which can be very ornate, some more modern/contemporary and many, many are eclectic and some few even get into bohemian styles.  Hopefully the analogy makes sense.  To carry it further, all these ‘decorating’ styles can work to make a home of faith if the person who dwells in them makes the effort to keep their home and themselves clean and healthy (spiritually and morally).  The only homes that will eventually fail are those that lack the foundation of the gospel or who don’t properly maintain/care for the needs of their home.

 

9 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Go to the temple and listen to the wording. . It's a covenant, a contract.

If you don't like the contract, don't accept it. It won't be everlasting, and then you will like that, right?

You will still have the best possible after life you can possibly imagine!

Our entire church membership is The New and Everlasting Covenant.  Too many assume it is just eternal marriage and therefore that is the end all of exaltation, forgetting that baptism is called by the same name.  (Not saying this is you, Mark, just using your comment as the springboard to say this).  All the covenants we make in the Church through the ordinances are part of the New and Everlasting.  My guess is that any covenant God gave to his people in the past can be called the same even though he has not given the same covenants to all.  After all, circumcision was called an everlasting covenant for the Israelites, but it is not a covenant for modern Saints.

Quote

The term new and everlasting covenant is used frequently throughout the Doctrine and Covenants. President Joseph Fielding Smith gave the following definition of it:

“The new and everlasting covenant is the fulness of the gospel. It is composed of ‘All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations’ that are sealed upon members of the Church by the Holy Spirit of promise, or the Holy Ghost, by the authority of the President of the Church who holds the keys. The President of the Church holds the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood. He delegates authority to others and authorizes them to perform the sacred ordinances of the priesthood.

“Marriage for eternity is a new and everlasting covenant. Baptism is also a new and everlasting covenant, and likewise ordination to the priesthood, and every other covenant is everlasting and a part of the new and everlasting covenant which embraces all things.” (Answers to Gospel Questions, 1:65.)

I have lost the page to the above and am just going to include this link for a bit as support so I can post this.

https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/gs/new-and-everlasting-covenant?

Edited April 7, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

I need to work on the links, sorry. 
 

added:  the website keeps blanking out on me except the few pages that still use www instead of the abn version.  Is this something weird for just me, or are others experiencing it?

test:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-principles?lang=eng

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-principles?lang=eng

Okay, can’t get it to stay with the www version.  Any suggestions anyone?

Edited April 7, 2022 by Calm

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

I need to work on the links, sorry. 
 

added:  the website keeps blanking out on me except the few pages that still use www instead of the abn version.  Is this something weird for just me, or are others experiencing it?

test:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-principles?lang=eng

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-principles?lang=eng

Okay, can’t get it to stay with the www version.  Any suggestions anyone?

"I need to work on the links, sorry. "

You an' Tiger Woods!

Them thar boys from BYU mus be experimentin' agin 

Or mebe it's them Ruskies!

😏

Edited April 7, 2022 by mfbukowski

[JLHPROF]

7 hours ago, sunstoned said:

My Bishop believed this.  He was the first one that I knew of who thought this way.  He brought it up in priesthood meeting.  Since then, I have found that many members believe this.

I don't understand how a member can believe polygamy was wrong but the polygamists retained their prophetic calling and priesthood.

If Joseph erred in polygamy then he was a serial adulterer.  As was Brigham, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, Lorenzo Snow, Joseph F. Smith and Heber J. Grant.

Basically, if Joseph was a polygamist AND it was wrong these were wicked men and the Church was not led by inspired leaders.

He didn't err.

 

[JLHPROF]

16 hours ago, JAHS said:

"Wherefore I, the Lord, command and revoke, as it seemeth me good; and all this to be answered upon the heads of the rebellious, saith the Lord." (D&C 56: 4)
Plural marriage is still an eternal concept for those who have practiced it in the past.
The Lord still has to deal with the agency of man and therefore can change things according to His will and what man needs at the time.
Of course God can revoke the doctrine of marriage only being between a man and woman if He wants. I think however we are safe in assuming that He never will do that. 
It would go against everything we have been taught regarding the eternal nature of marriage and the concept of eternal increase between a man and woman which could not happen  with same sex couples.

At the same time the Lord also said D&C 58:32 I command and men obey not; I revoke and they receive not the blessing.

We must also remember the "answered upon the heads of the rebellious" and "receive not the blessing" part.  If God withdraws anything it may not be due to further light or good for us.

16 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

We no longer practice Mosaic law, how do you account for that?

Abraham Issac et al practiced polygamy, and then it got "turned off" as well

The law of Moses is literally called a temporal law.  It was never meant to be permanent followed.  Comparing it to eternal polygamy sealings is apples and oranges.

[Calm]

30 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

At the same time the Lord also said D&C 58:32 I command and men obey not; I revoke and they receive not the blessing.

We must also remember the "answered upon the heads of the rebellious" and "receive not the blessing" part.  If God withdraws anything it may not be due to further light or good for us.

The law of Moses is literally called a temporal law.  It was never meant to be permanent followed.  Comparing it to eternal polygamy sealings is apples and oranges.

Circumcision then, covenanted with Abraham 

Quote

He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

 

 

Edited April 7, 2022 by Calm

[Bernard Gui]

On 4/6/2022 at 10:23 PM, mfbukowski said:

Sex", like death, has no history because it is based in a biological event.

Sex and death are biologically based, yet when we attach human significance to them, we have a basis for a date when they became a human construction, or a "history".

If I am following this correctly, may I opine that the primacy of eternal heterosexual marriage was not generally known to the world until the 1830s when it was revealed as part of the Restoration? Our work in the temples is partly to make up for lost time, so to speak.

Edited April 8, 2022 by Bernard Gui

[pogi]

17 hours ago, Orthodox Christian said:

The Mosaic law was fulfilled in Christ, so Christians live now under grace not law, at least that's how we see it.

Because Abraham and Isaac practiced polygamy doesn't necessarily mean that it was God's will.

We believe that Christ was God's last word if you like, the last of the OT style prophets being John the Baptist, he  represented the end of the Mosaic Law, and the age of grace commenced with Christ.

Do you not equate commandments given in the New Testament with law?  Can grace even exist without law? 

If the Old Testament prophets violated serious law in living polygamy, why no condemnation or sign of disfavor for their deeds from God?

 

Edited April 7, 2022 by pogi

[Teancum]

18 hours ago, bluebell said:

I can't remember, are you atheist or agnostic now, or was that a different poster that I'm thinking of?

I am not atheist.  Maybe agnostic.  I would say more of a skeptic.  I still pray. I still seek spiritual things.

[Teancum]

18 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

No, the covenant is being sealed in the temple

 

 

That is not what 19th century LDS leaders taught or said.  Go argue with them.  I just let their words stand on their own.

[Teancum]

17 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

It always amuses me how stridently people quote Brother Brigham and other of the Brethren, as though what they said were canonical revelation -- which it is not.  However, it is true that the Constitution should have protected polygyny and other forms of non-traditional marriage.  The Supreme Court was wrong in Reynolds and in the Dredd Scott decision.  We can see that today, in hindsight.  That does not mean that SSM or polygyny or polyandry are good or bad, only that they should be a matter of free choice under our Constitution.  Only hypocrites don't understand why free choice is so important in our society.  The hypocrites want everyone to follow their dictatorial orders and their value judgments.  They hate freedom.

Own your prophets. I know its tough at times.  But I agree.  Their words really mean little and cannot be relied upon. Thus is the ever changing world of Mormonism.

 

I am all for freedom of choice.

[Teancum]

15 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

All quotes before the Manifesto. When the time came, it was suspended.

So they were all wrong.  Got it.  They suspended the EVERLASTING covenant.  50 years is pretty finite.

Edited April 7, 2022 by Teancum

[Teancum]

18 hours ago, Orthodox Christian said:

The Mosaic law was fulfilled in Christ, so Christians live now under grace not law, at least that's how we see it.

Because Abraham and Isaac practiced polygamy doesn't necessarily mean that it was God's will.

We believe that Christ was God's last word if you like, the last of the OT style prophets being John the Baptist, he  represented the end of the Mosaic Law, and the age of grace commenced with Christ.

Most here have had plenty on interaction with Orthodox Christians.  Mormonism and its doctrine will conflict with everything you posted above other than the law of Moses being fulfilled in Christ.

[Scott Lloyd]

11 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I’m not clear from this what it is you are trying to ascertain, but at any rate, the conference talks verbatim texts are now accessible at the Church’s website and on the Gospel Library app, so you and others are now free to explore President Oaks’s talk in its entirety (though I don’t hold out any great hope that many here will choose to do so). 
 

Here it is:

 

Divine Love in the Father’s Plan
By President Dallin H. Oaks
First Counselor in the First Presidency

The purpose of the doctrine and policies of this restored Church is to prepare God’s children for salvation in the celestial kingdom and for exaltation in its highest degree.

The gospel plan shows our Heavenly Father’s love for all His children. To understand this, we must seek to understand His plan and His commandments. He loves His children so much that He gave His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to be our Savior and Redeemer, to suffer and die for us. In the restored Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we have a unique understanding of our Heavenly Father’s plan. This gives us a different way of viewing the purpose of mortal life, the divine judgment that follows it, and the ultimate glorious destiny of all of God’s children.
I love you, my brothers and sisters. I love all of God’s children. When Jesus was asked, “Which is the great commandment in the law?” He taught that to love God and to love our neighbors are the first of God’s great commandments. Those commands are first because they invite us to grow spiritually by seeking to imitate God’s love for us. I wish we all had a better understanding of the loving doctrine and policies that our Heavenly Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, have established in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. What I say here seeks to clarify how God’s love explains that doctrine and the Church’s inspired policies.

I.

A common misunderstanding of the judgment that ultimately follows mortal life is that good people go to a place called heaven and bad people go to an everlasting place called hell. This erroneous assumption of only two ultimate destinations implies that those who cannot keep all the commandments required for heaven will necessarily be forever destined for hell.
A loving Heavenly Father has a better plan for His children. The revealed doctrine of the restored Church of Jesus Christ teaches that all the children of God—with exceptions too limited to consider here—will finally wind up in a kingdom of glory. “In my Father’s house are many mansions,” Jesus taught. From modern revelation we know that those mansions are in three different kingdoms of glory. In the Final Judgment each of us will be judged according to our deeds and the desires of our hearts. Before that, we will need to suffer for our unrepented sins. The scriptures are clear on that. Then our righteous Judge will grant us residence in one of those kingdoms of glory. Thus, as we know from modern revelation, all “shall be judged … , and every man shall receive according to his own works, his own dominion, in the mansions which are prepared.”
The Lord has chosen to reveal comparatively little about two of these kingdoms of glory. In contrast, the Lord has revealed much about the highest kingdom of glory, which the Bible describes as the “glory of the sun.”
In the “celestial” glory there are three degrees, or levels. The highest of these is exaltation in the celestial kingdom, wherein we may become like our Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. To help us develop the godly attributes and the change in nature necessary to realize our divine potential, the Lord has revealed doctrine and established commandments based on eternal law. This is what we teach in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints because the purpose of the doctrine and policies of this restored Church is to prepare God’s children for salvation in the celestial glory and, more particularly, for exaltation in its highest degree.
The covenants made and the blessings promised to the faithful in the temples of God are the key. This explains our worldwide building of temples, about which the choir has sung so beautifully. Some are puzzled at this emphasis, not understanding that the covenants and ordinances of the temple guide us toward achieving exaltation. This can be understood only in the context of the revealed truth of three degrees of glory. Because of our Heavenly Father’s great love for all of His children, He has provided other kingdoms of glory—as Elder Quentin L. Cook explained yesterday—all of which are more wonderful than we can comprehend.
The Atonement of Jesus Christ makes all of this possible. He has revealed that He “glorifies the Father, and saves all the works of his hands.” That salvation is granted in different kingdoms of glory. We know from modern revelation that “all kingdoms have a law given.” Significantly:
“He who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory.
“And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory.
“And he who cannot abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory.”
In other words, the kingdom of glory we receive in the Final Judgment is determined by the laws we choose to abide by in our Heavenly Father’s loving plan. Under that plan there are multiple kingdoms so that all of His children can be assigned to a kingdom where they can “abide.”

II.

The teachings and policies of the Lord’s restored Church apply these eternal truths in a way that can be fully understood only in the context of our Heavenly Father’s loving plan for all of His children.
Thus, we honor individual agency. Most are aware of this Church’s great efforts to promote religious freedom. These efforts are in furtherance of our Heavenly Father’s plan. We seek to help all of His children—not just our own members—enjoy the precious freedom to choose.
Similarly, we are sometimes asked why we send missionaries to so many nations, even among Christian populations. We are also asked why we give enormous humanitarian aid to persons who are not members of our Church without linking this to our missionary efforts. We do this because the Lord has taught us to esteem all of His children as our brothers and sisters, and we want to share our spiritual and temporal abundance with everyone.
Eternal doctrine also provides a distinctive perspective on children. Through this perspective we see the bearing and nurturing of children as part of the divine plan. It is a joyful and sacred duty of those given the power to participate in it. Therefore, we are commanded to teach and contend for principles and practices that provide the best conditions for the development and happiness of children under God’s plan.

III.

Finally, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is properly known as a family-centered Church. But not well understood is the reality that our family-centeredness is not limited to mortal relationships. Eternal relationships are also fundamental to our theology. The mission of the restored Church is to help all the children of God qualify for what God desires as their ultimate destiny. By the redemption provided through the Atonement of Christ, all may attain eternal life (exaltation in the celestial kingdom), which Mother Eve declared “God giveth unto all the obedient.” This is more than salvation. President Russell M. Nelson has reminded us that “in God’s eternal plan, salvation is an individual matter; [but] exaltation is a family matter.”
Fundamental to us is God’s revelation that exaltation can be attained only through faithfulness to the covenants of an eternal marriage between a man and a woman. That divine doctrine is why we teach that “gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.”
That is also why the Lord has required His restored Church to oppose social and legal pressures to retreat from His doctrine of marriage between a man and a woman, to oppose changes that homogenize the differences between men and women or confuse or alter gender.
The restored Church’s positions on these fundamentals frequently provoke opposition. We understand that. Our Heavenly Father’s plan allows for “opposition in all things,” and Satan’s most strenuous opposition is directed at whatever is most important to that plan. Consequently, he seeks to oppose progress toward exaltation by distorting marriage, discouraging childbearing, or confusing gender. However, we know that in the long run, the divine purpose and plan of our loving Heavenly Father will not be changed. Personal circumstances may change, and God’s plan assures that in the long run, the faithful who keep their covenants will have the opportunity to qualify for every promised blessing.
A uniquely valuable teaching to help us prepare for eternal life, “the greatest of all the gifts of God,” is the 1995 proclamation on the family. Its declarations are, of course, different from some current laws, practices, and advocacy, such as cohabitation and same-sex marriage. Those who do not fully understand the Father’s loving plan for His children may consider this family proclamation no more than a changeable statement of policy. In contrast, we affirm that the family proclamation, founded on irrevocable doctrine, defines the kind of family relationships where the most important part of our eternal development can occur.
That is the context for the unique doctrine and policies of the restored Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

IV.

In many relationships and circumstances in mortal life, each of us must live with differences. As followers of Christ who should love our fellow men, we should live peacefully with those who do not believe as we do. We are all children of a loving Heavenly Father. For all of us, He has destined life after death and, ultimately, a kingdom of glory. God desires all of us to strive for His highest possible blessings by keeping His highest commandments, covenants, and ordinances, all of which culminate in His holy temples being built throughout the world. We must seek to share these truths of eternity with others. But with the love we owe to all of our neighbors, we always accept their decisions. As a Book of Mormon prophet taught, we must press forward, having “a love of God and of all men.”
As President Russell M. Nelson declared in our last conference: “There has never been a time in the history of the world when knowledge of our Savior is more personally vital and relevant to every human soul. … The pure doctrine of Christ is powerful. It changes the life of everyone who understands it and seeks to implement it in his or her life.”

May we all implement that sacred doctrine in our own lives, I pray in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

In comparing the published text of President Oaks’s talk with the partial transcription I made and posted in this thread early Monday morning, I note that a word has been changed. Where President Oaks in the spoken version said, “… the family proclamation, founded on unchangeable doctrine …” the wording in the written text has been changed to read, “… the family proclamation, founded on irrevocable doctrine, …”. 
 

So the change, presumably made by President Oaks himself as conference speakers are routinely privileged to change their own texts for publication, substituted the word irrevocable for the word unchangeable. I don’t know why he would make this change (I suppose one would have to ask President Oaks himself to know) but I don’t see that it matters materially, as irrevocable and unchangeable are synonymous. 
 

To be sure that I had not made an error in my transcription, I just now reviewed the YouTube video of President Oaks giving the talk in the Conference Center. I found he did indeed use the word unchangeable in the spoken version. 

Edited April 7, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

56 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

In comparing the published text of President Oaks’s talk with the partial transcription I made and posted in this thread early Monday morning, I note that a word has been changed. Where President Oaks in the spoken version said, “… the family proclamation, founded on unchangeable doctrine …” the wording in the written text has been changed to read, “… the family proclamation, founded on irrevocable doctrine, …”. 
 

So the change, presumably made by President Oaks himself as conference speakers are routinely privileged to change their own texts for publication, substituted the word irrevocable for the word unchangeable. I don’t know why he would make this change (I suppose one would have to ask President Oaks himself to know) but I don’t see that it matters materially, as irrevocable and unchangeable are synonymous. 
 

To be sure that I had not made an error in my transcription, I just now reviewed the YouTube video of President Oaks giving the talk in the Conference Center. I found he did indeed use the word unchangeable in the spoken version. 

I have changed the thread title to reflect the one-word change in the written text of President Oaks’s talk. 

Edited April 7, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Own your prophets. I know its tough at times.  But I agree.  Their words really mean little and cannot be relied upon. Thus is the ever changing world of Mormonism.

 

I am all for freedom of choice.

Freedom of choice does not mean that prophets are wrong or misguided.  Only that a prophet is not always a prophet, etc.  It is all too easy to confuse offhand opinion with true prophetic counsel.  For all her criticism, Fawn Brodie, for example, thought the Mormon POV remarkably consistent.  One needs to step back and take a wider view.

[teddyaware]

21 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I have changed the thread title to reflect the one-word change in the written text of President Oaks’s talk. 

I believe it’s likely the change was made to underscore the fact that there can be no wiggle room nor expectation of modification in principles set fort in the Proclamation. 

[Calm]

15 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

I believe it’s likely the change was made to underscore the fact that there can be no wiggle room nor expectation of modification in principles set fort in the Proclamation. 

Irrevocable has the connotation of a law being given and never meant to be rescinded, impossible to do so in fact rather than an eternal state of being. It is an interesting choice, imo.  The root word is from vocare, to call, re is back; so revoke is to call back. Ir is not and able is ability; so irrevocable is the inability to call back while unchangeable is the inability to alter according to its roots. Irrevocable has the sense of an agent being involved to me, in this case it is God since it is God’s law Pres Oaks is speaking of. 

Edited April 7, 2022 by Calm

[pogi]

30 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I have changed the thread title to reflect the one-word change in the written text of President Oaks’s talk. 

I noted that it still says that it is "founded upon" irrevocable doctrine, and not that the document itself is irrevocable doctrine.  He could have directly said that, but he chose not to.  With his legal background, he is very careful, intentional and deliberate with every word.  I am confident that his indirect wording was not a mistake.  I think he would like it to become irrevocable and binding doctrine via common consent and canonization, but he knows it is not there yet - hence the careful wording.   If he becomes the next President, I wouldn't be surprised if that becomes one of his first orders of business given his determined cause to reinforce this message almost every year or two over the course of a decade in conference talks, but as it stands the current President doesn't seem to be going that direction.  I am also confident that there will not be a unanimous consent if that happens.  

 

 

 

[Calm]

On 4/4/2022 at 7:44 AM, Fether said:

Oh really? Do you know if examples of this?

Here is one example from Brigham Young. Sometimes critics or supporters of the belief polygamy is required to be lived use this by not including the full quote.

Quote

We wish to obtain all that father Abraham obtained. I wish here to say to the Elders of Israel, and to all the members of this Church and kingdom, that it is in the hearts of many of them to wish that the doctrine of polygamy was not taught and practiced by us...It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you, and all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained. This is as true as that God lives. You who wish that there were no such thing in existence, if you have in your hearts to say: "We will pass along in the Church without obeying or submitting to it in our faith or believing this order, because, for aught that we know, this community may be broken up yet, and we may have lucrative offices offered to us; we will not, therefore, be polygamists lest we should fail in obtaining some earthly honor, character and office, etc,"—the man that has that in his heart, and will continue to persist in pursuing that policy, will come short of dwelling in the presence of the Father and the Son, in celestial glory. The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy. Others attain unto a glory and may even be permitted to come into the presence of the Father and the Son; but they cannot reign as kings in glory, because they had blessings offered unto them, and they refused to accept them.^[2]

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Mormonism_and_polygamy/Brigham_Young_said_that_the_only_men_who_become_gods_are_those_that_practice_polygamy

”At least in your faith” and “enter into it” are not contradictory if Brigham was talking about fully accepting plural marriage as a principle, that those called to be joined in a plural marriage would obey and those not called would still support others and not condemn them. 
 

As an example of not being supportive….my great great grandmother would talk about how the monogamous wives looked down on the polygamous ones in their town near Logan, treating them with arrogant pity. She, unfortunately, was not much better for she was disdainful of them (I suspect as a way to protect her self esteem, it was not an easy life for her though she was the one who pushed her husband to seek the blessings for their family) and said there was never a monogamous wife who had a clean step, implying they were poor housekeepers, perhaps because they were lazy or just never been pushed to be disciplined as might be a necessity in a plural marriage where the father was not always there to help or one was helping to care for a sister wife’s children as my great grandmother did iirc (I get her and her mother mixed up, one cared for an invalid sister wife for much of her adulthood, the other had a number of sister wives later in her marriage).  Otoh, I have heard of a number of stories where monogamous wives took in polygamous wives or their children when times were difficult or their husband was on a mission. This would be living the principle even while not plurally married oneself, imo.