Thoughts on the Upcoming General Conference

I was asked at MormonMatters recently to give my thoughts on what I would like to see at the upcoming General Conference. So, gutted from my comment there, here is what I would like to see.
First up is my requisite demi-feminist concerns, and there I would like to see:
  • Women giving more than two or three of the talks
  • A woman addressing the priesthood session
  • Women offering prayers
  • RS, YW, and Primary Presidency members referred to as “President Lastname”
I would like to see some talks which address deeper doctrinal issues, such as:
  • A talk addressing problematic sealings resulting from death and/or divorce and re-marriage
  • A talk offering hope and encouragement to part-member families, and not simply hope that the non-member spouse will be converted
  • A talk which focuses on a more problematic area of church history
  • A talk on how you feel when your mission wasn’t “the best two years” of your life and overcoming feelings of inadequacy and failure
  • A testimony and personal talk from a convert who lived a truly worldly life before conversion.*
I’d also like to see a more upbeat choir as a sign that the church is beginning to embrace other styles of worship.
(BTW, these are things I would like to see which I think are reasonable, gradual changes to make. I’m not listing things like “I’d like the church to denounce Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon” or “I’d like to see a revelation giving women the priesthood.”)
What will actually happen:
  • Talks will be given by two women, neither of them in the priesthood session, and they won’t be addressed as “President.”
  • Prayers will all be offered by men.
  • There will be the usual choirs in the usual style.
  • Talks will be on subjects like faith, repentance, baptism, gift of the Holy Ghost, tithing, sharing the gospel, doing family history, the importance of getting married in the temple, the importance of temple work, strengthening the family, and how amazing those pioneers were. Maybe there will be a talk directed at how wonderful motherhood/womanhood/homemaking is.
  • There will be a talk aimed at traditional Christianity. Wild Guess: it will focus on traditional Christian “divisions” in contrast to the LDS church’s unity.
If we get really lucky, someone will come down on the Bloggernacle for being critical of the Brethren. That will suck for my LDS blogging friends, but be extremely entertaining to me. *crosses fingers*
In any case, I don’t think I’ll be live-blogging General Conference this time, or even watching it, for two reasons: (1) Last time I did that my husband got stuck managing our daughter and he complained that he didn’t get to listen to Conference very well, and (2) Honestly? I really don’t feel like watching it. Maybe it’s just because I find my studies at Trinity to be so deep and invigorating and new to me, but lately I just have not been as fascinated by the LDS church as I used to be.
So, I think I’m going to take the daughter to the play area at the mall on Saturday and sit this one out. I did go to the Relief Society session last week, and had intended to post some thoughts on that, but now I really don’t have much to say that hasn’t been said elsewhere in the Bloggernacle. I think ditching the “enrichment” name is a tiny change in the right direction, and I appreciated that they tried to make Relief Society participation the complement of priesthood instead of motherhood or womanhood. The rest of it was predictably dull, and I’m rather disappointed that the church continues to ignore working mothers.
Enjoy your Conference weekend.
————————————
* Does anybody else find it strange that there are practically no converts serving in the upper crust of church leadership? Dieter F. Uchtdorf (Second Counselor in the First Presidency) was born to non-LDS parents who converted when he was a child. Richard G. Scott and David A. Bednar of the Quorum of the Twelve were born into part-member families wherein their fathers eventually converted, but it sounds like they still grew up in the church. Silvia H. Allred’s (1st Counselor in RS Presidency) family converted during childhood, and Vicki F. Matsumori (2nd Counselor in Primary Presidency) was born to non-LDS parents in Utah who still sent her to an LDS ward so that she was baptized at age 8 with her parents later converting themselves. I’m not finding anyone who converted as an adult in current church leadership.

Comments

Thoughts on the Upcoming General Conference — 37 Comments

  1. I would be impressed if the sisters serving in auxiliary presidencies were actually called presidents. (My bishop does this in our ward, and I think it is awesome!)
    There are a number of Seventies who are converts, including Charles Didier who is in the Presidency of the Seventy. Oh, wait, never mind – Elder Didier is no longer serving in that office. There are several members of the Quorums of the Seventy who are converts, though.
    As far as the nature of the talks, I remember one of the Apostles pointing out that, as a General Authority, it was his responsibility to speak to the general membership of the Church. I imagine this is particularly true for General Conference. Hence, the talks on general topics. (But I’m hoping for a side-comment or two about the members of the Bloggernacle tweeting in the Conference Center.)
  2. Sorry to hear you’re sitting this one out Jack.
    Oh well…in the end, I guess, all we can do is let the dead bury their dead.
  4. I agree that a lot of this would be nice, but don’t see how they could address things like Mormon history when most people aren’t even familiar with the more problematic aspects. While I would like to see them addressed, I think the best place to do that might be in regular church meetings, gradually. Otherwise people would freak out, which is pretty unproductive. I would add that if we could have some Women’s Conference talks that addressed something doctrinal, rather than RS history and general awesomness, or the importance of women, etc, I would be overjoyed. But even though I don’t expect any of these things to happen, I am still looking forward to Conference.
  5. I need to say something.
    I’ve been irate lately, for reasons that are too complicated and too personal to explain in a public setting. I’ve been in an attitude where I’m much more inclined to try to find problems with the LDS church, rather than step back and try to see things in perspective. I haven’t really been myself.
    So, that’s part of why I’m not watching conference. I feel like I’m in no mood to stand back and try to appreciate the good things that go on; I’ll only sit there and fault-find the bad.
    Maybe I will be in a more conference-going mood when April rolls around next year. In the meantime, I truly hope everyone has a great Conference weekend.
  6. Good luck in your journey. I hope you have a ton of fun with your daughter today. I admire you for having the strength to avoid something that would not be productive for you.
  7. Sorry to hear that you’re feeling grumpy, Jack. Feel better. And don’t worry, there will always be future conferences. Maybe next time, we can play conference bingo together. (You get a square for a woman speaker, a square for a non-white speaker, a square for a non-hymnbook hymn, a square for Prop 8, a square for “follow the Prophet” . . . )
  8. I’ve been in an attitude where I’m much more inclined to try to find problems with the LDS church, rather than step back and try to see things in perspective. I haven’t really been myself.
    So, what brought this on? I noticed your tone lately has been more of the average “Convert the Mormons” blog.
    Also, fMh has an interesting blog on Conference. I missed it today, due to massive sinus issues.
    Does anybody else find it strange that there are practically no converts serving in the upper crust of church leadership?
    President Howard W. Hunter was born in a part member family.
  9. I noticed your tone lately has been more of the average “Convert the Mormons” blog.
    Um… huh? The only blog post I’ve done along these lines in ages is the “How to Witness to Mormon Missionaries” post, and that was done at the suggestion of and in collaboration with other evangelical bloggers. It was immediately preceded by a post which said fairly nice things about the LDS doctrine of pre-existence. Is there something else that’s connoting a “convert the Mormons” tone?
    It’s hard to say how I’ve gotten into this mood. Part of it has been that attempts to discuss interfaith matters with my husband have not been going so well.
  10. Jack, I can’t believe you’re not watching Conference!! What if there’s a talk on Polygamist Jesus and you miss it?!?!
    :)
  11. ..that was done at the suggestion of and in collaboration with other evangelical bloggers.
    Was that then giving into what was popular with the crowd, i.e. “itching ears” syndrome, with them? Will you dismiss discussion of things like Theosis if the Evangelicals out there don’t want to hear that it has Christian precedence?
    That’s one of the big problems I have with the anti- types out there: If something can be shown to be believed or practiced in general Christianity that the anti-’s at first denounce, do they change what they say in light of other evidence? Yet, the anti’s then say how sincere they are, but being sincere does nothing for saving the Mormons?
    Sorry, but that other “Convert the Mormons” post did get a little much.
  12. Was that then giving into what was popular with the crowd, i.e. “itching ears” syndrome, with them?
    Mike, correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds like you’re accusing Jack of just “following the crowd” as her primary reason for writing her How to Witness to Missionaries post. If that’s what you meant, this response is directed to you. If not, forgive me for misreading you and enjoy the rant aimed at…well… someone else.
    But here goes…
    I think it’s the height of hypocricy when Mormons get all up in arms about non-LDS Christians trying to convert us. After all, we do it to them ALL THE EFFING TIME.
    If you can’t stand conversion strategies being tossed around for a few minutes on the internet, then do me a favor and spend a day in the MTC or even an hour in your local ward mission meeting. What else are we doing there but discussing conversion strategies?
    This isn’t a condemnation or a complaint, by the way. It’s just the way things are. But there’s no doubt your average LDS person (especially if s/he’s an RM) has spent exponentially more time learning and discussing conversion strategies aimed at mainstream Christians than your average mainstream Christian has spent learning and discussing conversion strategies aimed at Mormons.
    So if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Hell, get out of the house–or move across town. ‘Cuz that’s just the way things are done ’round these here parts.
    Oh, and before you or anyone else throws out that line about how we’re not out to “convert” people but “add to their knowledge about God,” forget it. It’s a lovely thought, but when it gets right down to brass tacks, it’s complete semantical hooey.
    Because we ARE out to convert people. And if not, someone was playing a pretty cruel joke on me for that year and a half I spent trudging through the streets of Bulgaria, asking people to abandon cherished traditions, cultural heritage, and family faith that went back centuries deep.
    /deep breath
    All this admittedly-emotional discourse to say: Jack’s entitled to write a post like that every once in a while!
    The end.
  13. Mike H. ~ Was that then giving into what was popular with the crowd, i.e. “itching ears” syndrome, with them?
    Do I really come off as someone who gives a damn about what’s popular with evangelical Christians? I agreed to weigh in on the issue because three different missiological perspectives on how to approach Mormon missionaries sounded like an interesting topic, and between Tim and Aaron and I, arguably I tend to have the most liberal approach. I also feel that it’s better if people Googling for “How to Witness to Mormon Missionaries” wind up here rather than at CARM or another “ministry” that treats Mormons poorly.
    However, I also don’t really give a damn about what’s popular with Mormons. If people are forgetting that I’m an evangelical Christian, that I think Mormonism is a Christian heresy, and that I think there are valid reasons for evangelicals to seek to convert Mormons, and they’re reading my blog under the expectation that they’re never going to hear posts expressing those views, then I’m probably doing something wrong.
    I think those are unrealistic expectations for interfaith friendships. If I saw anyone at T&S, fMh or BCC doing a post on the best way to reach out to evangelicals, I wouldn’t feel the least bit offended, nor would I threaten to stop reading or complain that those blogs had become hostile to evangelicals. It’s a given to me that Mormons and evangelicals have an interest in converting each other.
    Will you dismiss discussion of things like Theosis if the Evangelicals out there don’t want to hear that it has Christian precedence?
    This is my post on theosis.
    This is how other evangelicals treated me for writing it.
    I have no regrets about writing it and would write more on it if the occasion arose. Does that answer your question?
    Katie ~ Thank you. You took the thoughts out of my head.
    I apologize again if this comment sounds cranky. It really has been a bad week for me.
  14. Jack, FWIW, I totally agree with you and Katie on this. Of all the folks I have run across in the blogging world, you seem to be the least likely to care about what’s popular. And it is why I love reading your blog, even though I obviously disagree with you on a lot of theological points.
    Props to you for standing up for what you believe in and saying to hell with what others think you should think!
  15. By the by, I was just looking over your list of expectations…
    Does Elder Holland’s claim that criticisms of the Book of Mormon come across as pathetic and weak, especially the claims of the Spaulding manuscript, count as a focus on “a more problematic area of church history”?
    Also, does the painfully awkward Aaronic Priesthood choir count as an “embrace [of] other styles of worship”?
  16. Alex Valencic ~ Does Elder Holland’s claim that criticisms of the Book of Mormon come across as pathetic and weak, especially the claims of the Spaulding manuscript, count as a focus on “a more problematic area of church history”?
    Yes and no. I was quite surprised to hear Holland mention those criticisms even just to dismiss them, because I’m highly doubtful that the average member knows what the Solomon Spaulding and Views of Hebrews theories are. I’m wondering if Holland’s mention of them won’t backfire a bit and send members Googling up anti-Mormon sites to find out what he was talking about.
    You can be sure that I’ll have further analysis of Holland’s talk later this week when text versions of the talks are made available, and some of the ones which took shots at traditional Christianity.
  17. Do I really come off as someone who gives a damn about what’s popular with evangelical Christians?
    Well, you did mention on “I Love Gellies”:
    Eventually I’m going to do a series on Walter Martin and the problem he poses for evangelical outreach to Mormons, but he has a lot of disciples among the countercult community, so I’m approaching the topic carefully.
    So, why approach that carefully, if it may disturb the countercult community? This lead to me being puzzled.
    I have no regrets about writing it and would write more on it if the occasion arose. Does that answer your question?
    Yes, it does. I admit to also being cranky lately myself from the horrific sinus problems I have the last few days.
    Now, Holland’s talk may be a reference to the DNA charges against the BOM.
  18. “You can be sure that I’ll have further analysis of Holland’s talk later this week when text versions of the talks are made available, and some of the ones which took shots at traditional Christianity.”
    Sweet! I’ll be looking forward to your analysis.
  19. Mike H. ~ I’m approaching Walter Martin carefully because, believe it or not, not all of his still-living supporters are complete nincompoops. If I shoot from the hip at him, I’ll likely get my hat handed to me. I want my case for why evangelical Christians ought to divorce themselves from his work to be airtight.
  20. Jack said:
    I was quite surprised to hear Holland mention those criticisms even just to dismiss them, because I’m highly doubtful that the average member knows what the Solomon Spaulding and Views of Hebrews theories are. I’m wondering if Holland’s mention of them won’t backfire a bit and send members Googling up anti-Mormon sites to find out what he was talking about.
    The intensity of Elder Holland’s talk definitely surprised me. He didn’t approach the subject in the way that I would have, but it was still good to hear a talk that broke the mold of conference talks, which (even when good) tend to sound all alike after a while.
    As to a “backfire” effect, who knows? While the anti-Mormons bring those up, there’s also quite a bit of debunking of those theories as well. You can even read the entire “View of the Hebrews” on the BYU Studies web site.
    Like everyone else in the bloggernacle, I especially liked President Uchtdorf’s talk. Chances are that most of the people speaking grew up and/or live within 200 miles of each other, so even the fact that someone is German allows him to provide a bit of a different perspective.
    I’m not sure there was much new in it per se, but statements such as this are a good counterpoint to the “God’s love is not unconditional” statement we’ve heard elsewhere:
    God’s love is so great that He loves even the proud, the selfish, the arrogant and the wicked.
    And this makes me think of some of the things that Katie L has said, so I hope she heard this:
    His pure love directs and encourages us to become more pure and holy. It inspires us to walk in righteousness — not out of fear or obligation but out of an earnest desire to become even more like Him, because we love Him.
    There really was some good stuff in that talk.
  21. Also, does the painfully awkward Aaronic Priesthood choir count as an “embrace [of] other styles of worship”?
    Alex. Having been warned in advance of the painfully flat choir was one reason I chose to forgo the meeting and listen to the internet broadcast later. I just don’t think I could have taken it…
  22. Having been warned in advance of the painfully flat choir was one reason I chose to forgo the meeting…
    This reminds me of the story of Pres. Heber J. Grant driving to a Stake Conference in Arizona, with Rudger Clawson & J. Golden Kimball. At one point in the trip, Pres. Grant sang several hymns. Afterward, Elder Clawson & Kimball stated they would have a nervous breakdown if Pres. Grant was to continue singing!
    Of course, J. Golden Kimball may have stated that even more bluntly!
    The Spaulding Manuscript thing comes & goes in cycles. But, the Browns took the 1970′s reinvention of that claim to task.
  23. and family faith that went back centuries deep.
    Katie: I wondered if the Communists had pretty well eliminated religion in Bulgaria. I guess it was like Russia, though, where religion was just below the surface.
  24. Jack,
    Elder Sitati who spoke in the last session joined the Church ten yeasr after being married and receiving a bachelor’s degree.
    It doesnt’ sound like he had a “worldly life,” but he is defnitely a convert during adulthood.
    Also, FWIW, many of the Seventy were baptized as teenagers, which I view as vastly different than being baptized as a child.
  25. Regarding the choir –
    The “usual choirs” in the “usual style” are in the style of choral music that has existed for centuries. The choral world as a whole still follows this tradition, with the majority of choral works set in the “usual style.” It’s not like we Mormons suddenly came out of the woodwork and said, “Hey, let’s bore everybody with a new genre that we will call ‘choral music.’”
    No, our official Church choir has long followed in the well-established choral tradition. Even if people are bored by it, the MoTab committed to that tradition long ago, and it (the tradition) is well respected in the muscial profession, and many still find it deeply inspiring (even outside the Church). While I was in BYU Singers, we went to the American Choral Director’s Assoc. National Conference. All the choirs there fell into the same tradition.
    You may view it as arcane or boring, but I’m just trying to point out that there is a very broad community of respected professionals that embrace this style of music, and thus would see no problem with the Church embracing that tradition in their worship.
  26. John Rutter’s choral compositions are gorgeous.
    I thought the young men choir was delightful. Don’t you people know how difficult it is to get teenage boys to sing at all? And, for what it’s worth, the relative pitch was fine, considering the raw material.
    As for Jack’s post, I think there’s a substantive difference between “witnessing back at the Elders” and “converting them”. Why not let an EV Christian explain the hope that is in him?
    I could rant for days about the good works various Christian movements do in the world. “Mormons Helping Hands” is really good stuff, but in simple numbers, we’re dwarfed entirely by EV mission efforts, so much so that around where I live we simply federate with them and help them in those common causes.
  29. yeah, I’d be perfectly happy without any music at all in meetings.
    Rob: that talked condemned me like I wish it hadn’t. sigh.
  30. My thought is why doesn’t President Monson speak like a prophet? The world is going insane. The Iranians want to destroy Israel and USA. The economy is temporarily being held together with toothpicks & spitballs. I don’t know a single person who hasn’t had major financial setbacks in their lives. Our president and his administration literally do NOT like America and are not only playing footsie with our enemies, but are passing legislation that will reduce our freedoms and rights. But do we hear the Prophet of God speak boldly about what is happening and what threats are facing us. Samuel the Lamanite stood up on a wall and told the people to repent and change their ways. I hear a more prophetic message from Glenn Beck on Fox news than I do from the pulpits of General Conference.
  31. … Trying to contain myself when I see the words “prophetic message and “Glenn Beck” in the same sentence …
  32. Agreed. Still giggling.
    You know what I think is the biggest problem facing us? Citizens who get their “facts” from entertainment shows like Glenn Beck.
  34. Y’all can throw those stones at Beck all you want, but just like Samuel the Lamanite he cannot be injured by normal projectiles. ;)
  37. I wonder if Glenn Beck actually reads, or listens to, what GA’s say:
    The Mormon Ethic of Civility
Categories:

Related Post:



0 коментарі:

Post a Comment

ClobberBlog | Mormonism, Evangelical Christianity