What's General Conference without a stand from some group


pam
 Share

Recommended Posts

If they are opposed to church leaders/policy/doctrine why don't they just leave the LDS church?  I don't understand why people stay where they are not happy. 

 

They want to re-create their movement in their own image?  Many Protestant denominations are going through this, over the issue of LBGT identity, practice, and acceptance.  Liberal groups that have affirmed LBGT marriages, the ordination of those in active LBGT relationships, etc. have conservatives who hope to reclaim and rescue their denominations.  Some leave, but others feel called to stay and contend for truth with a people they love.  Alternatively, conservative groups often have younger clergy who don't want to leave, yet they no longer accept the rejection of LBGT mores by their leadership.  Rather than leave, they hope to drag their denominations kicking and screaming into what they consider the modern, enlightened era.  I find myself in the latter situation.  And yes, I wish the contenders would just leave. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People objecting at General Conference because of the Church's open stance against the ERA.

 

I remember watching General Conference back in the late 70's (or perhaps it was early 80's,) and there was a particular dissenter that I thought I recognized.  Her name was later mentioned in the paper, and I actually did know her.  She happened to have been a missionary that was in the same mission with me.  I thought: "What the heck?  How can she do this?"  Then I thought back on her personality, and I could see how she might have become a dissenter.  It made me incredibly sad because I knew her.  Satan can deceive the very elect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember watching General Conference back in the late 70's (or perhaps it was early 80's,) and there was a particular dissenter that I thought I recognized.  Her name was later mentioned in the paper, and I actually did know her.  She happened to have been a missionary that was in the same mission with me.  I thought: "What the heck?  How can she do this?"  Then I thought back on her personality, and I could see how she might have become a dissenter.  It made me incredibly sad because I knew her.  Satan can deceive the very elect.

That's very true about the very elect can be deceived. In the last days it's possible that the very elect could be deceived.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the October 1980 Conference:

 

President Marion G. Romney:  It is proposed that we sustain President Spencer W. Kimball as prophet, seer, and revelator, and President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. All in favor, please manifest it. Contrary, by the same sign.

 

[A call of “no” from several in the congregation]

 

Elder McConkie: President Romney, it appears that there are three negative votes. This is to advise those so voting that they may meet with Elder Gordon B. Hinckley of the Council of the Twelve following this session. Thank you.

 

President Romney: Thank you.

 

[Proceeds with the rest of the names]

 

President Romney:  It seems, President Kimball, that the voting has been unanimous, with the exceptions already noted, in favor of these officers and the General Authorities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Pam, sorrry, I won't be able to make April, but don't worry, there's no need to cancel the event, because I might be able to make it for May. Perhaps you could use your mod. powers to shift General Conference back by a month?  :P

 

 

Let me see what I can do.  But no guarantees.   :P

 

palerider on 6 Mar

Lol!!! I will have to watch this go down....

 

The protesters are probably planning on General Conference being held in early April, but I know that Pam is working on having it held in May, so despite palerider's lack of faith I'm sure the protest will fail, thanks to Pam.  :)

Edited by askandanswer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

palerider on 6 Mar

Lol!!! I will have to watch this go down....

 

The protesters are probably planning on General Conference being held in early April, but I know that Pam is working on having it held in May, so despite palerider's lack of faith I'm sure the protest will fail, thanks to Pam.  :)

That's a good one .....Lol!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

palerider on 6 Mar

Lol!!! I will have to watch this go down....

 

The protesters are probably planning on General Conference being held in early April, but I know that Pam is working on having it held in May, so despite palerider's lack of faith I'm sure the protest will fail, thanks to Pam.  :)

 

 

 

I need to start remembering not to have a drink in my mouth when I read your posts. This is the 2nd time I've bust out laughing.  Stop it!!  :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they are opposed to church leaders/policy/doctrine why don't they just leave the LDS church?  I don't understand why people stay where they are not happy. 

 

I don't think that would be practical. For example, if a certain man was called to be the bishop of a certain ward, and a member of that ward, knew this man practiced polygamy secretly and therefore opposed this man's calling. His leaving the LDS church would not deal with the problem of this other man's bishop calling and his secret polygamous life style.

 

M.

Edited by Maureen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that would be practical. For example, if a certain man was called to be the bishop of a certain ward, and a member of that ward, knew this man practiced polygamy secretly and therefore opposed this man's calling. His leaving the LDS church would not deal with the problem of this other man's bishop calling and his secret polygamous life style.

 

M.

 

 

I call foul on this example...  In the example the Leader is clearly violating the Church's standards and therefore the correct course is to bring it to the proper authorities and make sure they known by those who need to know.  That is a totally different case then saying.... The Church has this very clear Standard that I don't like or agree with...  But instead of finding a more like minded group I am going to raise a stink until they adjust their standard to my liking...  Two very different cases

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be it known there are some members out there with the warped notion it is their duty to change the Church from the inside out. I don't believe it's a matter of peaceful disagreement where one should graciously bow out and start one's own church. These people believe they are right and therefore must change the system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I call foul on this example...  In the example the Leader is clearly violating the Church's standards and therefore the correct course is to bring it to the proper authorities and make sure they known by those who need to know.  That is a totally different case then saying.... The Church has this very clear Standard that I don't like or agree with...  But instead of finding a more like minded group I am going to raise a stink until they adjust their standard to my liking...  Two very different cases

 

My post was more a comment to Irishcolleen's statement of (paraphrasing) "if you oppose a (potential) leader than why not just leave the church." If a process is set up to either sustain or oppose a calling, then if a member knows of a reason why a calling should be opposed, they have every right to do so.

 

M. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My post was more a comment to Irishcolleen's statement of (paraphrasing) "if you oppose a (potential) leader than why not just leave the church." If a process is set up to either sustain or oppose a calling, then if a member knows of a reason why a calling should be opposed, they have every right to do so.

 

M. 

 

Her words were  If they are opposed to church leaders/policy/doctrine 

 

Your exampled covered a small segment of the possibilities in that group...  Leaders opposed because they are not living the standard..  There is still Policies, Doctrine, and Leaders you do not like for reasons other then they are sinning.  In those cases her point holds up really well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So this seems to be the latest thing for upcoming General Conference.

A group was organized to secure tickets for conference sessions so those who use these tickets can oppose the sustaining of leaders.

http://anyopposed.org/press-release-mormons-to-cast-opposing-vote-at-lds-general-confernce/

The world we have come to live it...that and militant members, seeking to approval of man and the world....being in the world and of the world. Little better than those who stand out on the sidewalks holding signs, yelling and put families and dragging BoM's on the ground on ropes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they are opposed to church leaders/policy/doctrine why don't they just leave the LDS church?  I don't understand why people stay where they are not happy. 

I'd wager that part of it is that there is some foothold of truth that does call to them, or some sense of belonging- otherwise it would be a lot easier to cut ties entirely.

People who have spiritual experiences are still susceptible to the devil if they aren't careful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share