Palerider Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 If I am ever called as a Bishop....I think I might oppose myself.....hhhmmmmm.....Lol!!! Jane_Doe, Crypto and Backroads 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 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. classylady, pam, Irishcolleen and 3 others 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 Oh dear...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classylady Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mordorbund Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) The silver lining in a dissent at General Conference is that it shows the local congregations that the general leadership operate on the same principles as the local leadership http://askgramps.org/23892/happens-cant-sustain-church-leader. Edited March 10, 2015 by mordorbund Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just_A_Guy Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 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. Backroads 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
askandanswer Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) 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? Let me see what I can do. But no guarantees. palerider on 6 MarLol!!! 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 March 10, 2015 by askandanswer pam and Jane_Doe 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted March 10, 2015 Report Share Posted March 10, 2015 palerider on 6 MarLol!!! 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!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted March 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 palerider on 6 MarLol!!! 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!! Palerider 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 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!! At least it wasn't a Gingy cookie. Lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted March 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 At least it wasn't a Gingy cookie. Lol I'm not a cannibal. Palerider and Backroads 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I'm not a cannibal.Is that right ..... Lol!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mordorbund Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I'm not a cannibal. But if you were would the act be inherently sinful? Or only sinful when combined with murder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarginOfError Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 But if you were would the act be inherently sinful? Or only sinful when combined with murder? So it's okay to eat the cookie as long as she doesn't bake the cookie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted March 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 You all are sick talking about eating the cookie. Backroads and Palerider 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maureen Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) 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 March 11, 2015 by Maureen Blackmarch and Litzy 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estradling75 Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 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 Leah, Vort, Litzy and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litzy Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 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. carlimac, Vort, Saldrin and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maureen Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 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. Just_A_Guy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estradling75 Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 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. Backroads 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pa Pa Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 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. Leah and Backroads 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
askandanswer Posted March 14, 2015 Report Share Posted March 14, 2015 (edited) You all are sick talking about eating the cookie. I think I'd rather have a gummi snack, or better yet, a whole packet. I can't see any error in that. Edited March 14, 2015 by askandanswer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackmarch Posted March 16, 2015 Report Share Posted March 16, 2015 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. Backroads, Litzy, EarlJibbs and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted March 16, 2015 Report Share Posted March 16, 2015 You all are sick talking about eating the cookie.We are all normal ...your the one who is sick......Lol!! mordorbund 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.