Periodically, the world lurches through serious changes. When it does, it forces people to choose between the world’s goals and the Church’s standards. When this happens, we go through a serious moment of apostasy.
Previous events in modern LDS history include:
- The nation’s banks collapsing in 1836-37, causing the failure of the Kirtland Savings, and many people leaving Joseph and the Church
- The first succession of Presidency after the death of Joseph Smith
- The end of polygamy under Wilford Woodruff
- Blacks receiving the priesthood (yes, there were many who left the Church either due to racist beliefs, or because they insisted JFSmith and BRMcConkie could not be wrong)
- Equal Rights Amendment of the 1970s/80s
- The September Six (early 1990s)
As we can see, some of these apostasy events were larger than others. Some affected only a small group, but were highly publicized, while others involved large numbers of members, and even apostles.
Today, I believe we are entering into an era that could open the door for another large movement away from the Church. There are three major areas affecting this:
- Gay rights
- Women’s rights
- Intellectual assaults on the Church
For the movement on Gay rights and on women’s rights in the Church, I think we may see some major apostasy. As gays and their supporters (including many LDS, such as Marie Osmond), push for gay marriage, we will see the Church forced to make a decision. The Church has established a line in the sand, based upon the Proclamation on the Family (which I hope becomes OD3 this General Conference), stating we will love all God’s children, but marriage ordained of God is between man and woman. So important is this concept that the header for OD1 was changed in the new LDS scriptures to proclaim that the standard is one man/one woman in marriage, unless God commands otherwise. I do not see God commanding otherwise, as scripture has only ever defined two types of marriage: traditional and polygamy.
On the women’s front, I have no problem with them praying in General Conference, wearing pants to Church (as long as it is part of a dress suit, and not something frilly), etc. I don’t even mind the Lord giving women A priesthood of their own, similar to what Joseph Smith gave the original Nauvoo Relief Society. However, this again must be done according to the Lord’s will and time, and not ours. In a recent discussion elsewhere, one sister bemoaned the fact that she was “dismayed” about 15 old white guys sitting in SLC, not allowing her to have the priesthood due to an old misogynistic tradition. I asked her, why she had to be dismayed about anything? Why did she assume they did not have her best interests at heart, while seeking the will of God? Such attitudes of distrust towards the Brethren will ultimately lead to apostasy.
The third area can also be tricky. Where does one draw the line between faithful intellectual discussion and research, and that which only breeds doubt? I know some members, who were shocked at the “rough” treatment they felt Richard Bushman gave Joseph Smith in “Rough Stone Rolling”. For me, however, I see a historian and patriarch, who wanted to write a scholarly book that was fair to history and to the real Joseph Smith.
OTOH, we see many websites and blogs that purport to be faithful, but then drain the spiritual energy out of the room. “Mormon Stories” by John Dehlin began as a worthwhile and evenly balanced venture, but turned into a focus on all things bad regarding Mormonism. Sensationalism and controversy were discussed, but rarely a faith building discussion. Such sites encourage people to walk away from the Church, rather than weigh the good and bad. Such sites focus on the physical senses (seeing, hearing, touching, feeling, tasting), but not the spiritual experience. There are many who once had a spiritual testimony that lost it in the confusion of “facts” interpreted or spun in a negative way.
Perhaps this is a warning to all of us to hold tight to the iron rod, and move forward to the Tree of Life. Do not allow the mists of darkness and the scoffers in the big building confuse us from the real task at hand. Gay marriage, women holding the priesthood, and historic blunders by prophets are issues, but they are not THE issues leading to eternal life.
It will be interesting, yet sad, to see who among us “stand in holy places and be not moved” (D&C 87:8)
*Note, asking or recommending something from the Brethren does not lead to apostasy, when faith is employed in those called of God. It is when we enter the room with a chip on the shoulder, daring our leaders to knock the chip off our shoulder that we begin the path to apostasy.
New Post: The Coming Apostasy: Periodically, the world lurches through serious changes. When it … http://t.co/54nSE6WAcm #LDS #Mormon
TheMillennialStar: The Coming Apostasy http://t.co/a8KpyaS2Oq #lds #mormon
Rame, I agree with your perspective. I would reemphasize your last paragraph. There is nothing wrong with people questioning. The issue is when questioning becomes advocacy against the Church. In such cases, people are on the road to apostasy.
I would add a possible fourth area that may challenge Latter-day Saints, and that is the Church’s support of immigration reform.
What troubles me are those who try to become soft toward those who are on the road to apostasy. They then ease off positions in the hopes that those with the chip will feel more comfortable. Of course, it only emboldens them and leads to more serious apostasy. It would be nice to see some in authority stand firm and not worry about those who will probably be enticed by the world and leave anyway.
I think Jettboy addresses a fifth area quite nicely, if not directly.
If, for example, a woman prays this weekend in General Conference, I know of quite a few people who will become extremely upset because they believe that the church gave into the demands of feminists.
They won’t be upset at the feminists. They’ll be upset at church leaders. And so they too will be at risk for apostacy.
rameumptom,
What gives you hope that the Proclamation on the Family will become OD3 any time soon? Boyd Packer tried to do that with a General Conference end run and it was pulled back! Wouldn’t it require President Monson’s declaration now?
Why did she assume they did not have her best interests at heart, while seeking the will of God? Such attitudes of distrust towards the Brethren will ultimately lead to apostasy. Why? Well, because they for got to ask her to pray at General Conference for 182 years! Not exactly confidence building if you’re a woman!
I agree we should be focused on the spiritual experience. The iron rod however is not a spiritual experience it is a hand rail for those with vertigo.
I, too, have been struggling as of late with certain policies of the church. The biggest one of which is the policy against bringing concealed firearms into church. I feel that the policy is a direct contradiction to the Proclamation on the Family where it states that once of my duties is to ‘provide the necessities of life and protection for their families’. How can I do that if I am disarmed and can no longer fight effectively to protect them in the case of an active shooter? I can’t.
I don’t know if it’s apostasy to support the rights of gays to marry, but I do. I don’t support any desire by gays to force churches, including ours, to solemnize these marriages, but I do support extending the full measure of liberty to all men, not just those with whom I agree with. Of course, as a libertarian, I’d like to get government out of the business of marriage altogether, but until that time, I think we need to stop abridging the rights of others to exercise their agency, even if we don’t agree with what they choose to do with it. As long as it’s not violating someone else’s rights, it’s none of our business.
One other thing. I’ve found that lately, on Facebook, many of my libertarian friends who are also members of the church, have been posting some very disturbing articles, videos, and quotes that purport to shed light on corruption in the church, specifically the general leadership. I have found myself wondering if any of it could be true. I am a truth-seeker and I want the truth, whatever that truth may be, even if it challenges my current paradigm and cherished beliefs. So, I find myself in a quandary. Do I read and watch these articles and videos and then investigate the claims in order to find the truth? Or do I avoid them in order to not have to make any painful decisions if I find that they have legitimacy? I’ve struggled to find an answer and I’ve prayed about it, but don’t seem to be getting any answers one way or the other.
Anyway, these are just some of the thoughts that I’ve had lately.
Personally, my biggest struggle with staying active is a lack of friends in my current ward. I went from playing a vital role in a small ward where I was basically friends with everyone, to a microscopic role in a larger ward where I simply don’t fit in well, and it’s often a struggle to get to church (although I do).
The other stuff is small beans, and I’m not about to lose my testimony over any of it, even if I disagree with some of it.
So here are my disagreements:
1. The fight against gay marriage. I have very mixed feelings and am pretty agnostic on gay marriage happening within the church, and I fully support the rights of churches to exclude gay marriages, but I do believe the government should either allow gays to marry or else leave marriages entirely to religions and instead offer up civil unions to everyone for purposes of taxes, hospital visits, inheritance, etc. I disagreed with the church’s involvement in Prop. 8.
2. Participation of women in church. Honestly, before Sister Dalton told women that there’s “no need to lobby for rights,” I was pretty agnostic about women having the priesthood. That comment got me off the fence (and not in the direction Sister Dalton was hoping for). However, I see the church making small but significant gains in this direction (more participation by RSP in leadership meetings, quite possibly women praying in church this General Conference, more sister missionaries, etc.) and as long as things are slowly improving here, I’m fine with it. I don’t think the church is ready for a full-out “women should have the priesthood,” announcement anyway, although I do think they should be allowed to be called into Sunday School Presidencies and other non-priesthood positions.
3. Anti-science comments. Elder Oaks and Elder Packer make these every once in a while, and I have to continue to remind myself that General Authorities aren’t perfect and that everyone makes comments about things they don’t understand well–including men of God.
So are these small beans enough to drive me towards apostacy? No. I realize no one’s perfect, and I shouldn’t expect the church to be perfect. Heck, I even realize that my own viewpoints may be wrong, and even if they’re right, they probably don’t matter as much as I think they do. The good far outweighs the bad.
Now to figure out how to feel more at home in my current ward…
Jettboy, I think there is being firm in the positions of the Church, and then there is being mean. Alma suggested we are “bold, but not overbearing.” So the GAs can say we should love our gay brothers and sisters, but not look upon sin with any allowance.
Howard, I think the Proclamation on fhe Family is viewed by some members as on the same level as the Adam-God theory, something someone said that can be ignored. By making it actual doctrine (note already the emphasis it has had in General Conferences over the last decade), members will have to deal with it directly as scripture. With the 2013 scriptures coming out in August, it becomes the perfect opportunity to add to the scriptures, just as we added in the 1981 edition.
Aaron, I have no problem with libertarian members (or others) supporting gay marriage, as you defined it. However, I see this in the way Harold Bloom described Sodom and Gomorrah. They weren’t destroyed because of homosexuality, but because of being “inhospitable”. IOW, only when they sought to impose their will on Lot and his visitors (including attempted rape) were they fully ripe in iniquity. We can consider what our government currently is doing in regards to Catholic hospitals being required to provide contraceptives and abortion pills as a form of this enforcement of sin upon the righteous. I can easily see churches losing their tax exempt status, etc., for standing against a pro-gay government.
As for the claims any group makes (libertarian, etc), we need to heed the warning of Elder McConkie when it comes to “gospel hobbies.” Such a virtue can be turned into a vice, and lead us away from the greatest truths. If you have a spiritual witness of the gospel and the living prophets, then why dirty your mind and soul investigating things that may or may not be true, or may be true but given an evil spin? My responsibility as a member of the Church is not to air dirty laundry about anyone, but to sustain the Brethren. If they sin, then they will have to answer to the Lord, which is fine by me.
I remember Elder Vaughan J. Featherstone relating years ago his story. He and his family lived modestly in a ward where the bishop hated him. Anytime there was a dirty assignment (clean toilets, etc), Brother and Sister Featherstone received it. One day, he went in and received a building assessment from the bishop. It was far higher than that assessed to the richest people in the ward. Brother Featherstone went home sad, and discussed it with his wife. They agreed the bishop was exercising unrighteous dominion, but chose to obey. They sold several items in their home and turned in the money. Not long afterward, the bishop was released and Brother Featherstone was called to the Quorum of Seventy. He was told in his ordination that the trial was of God. Had he not submitted, he would not have been found worthy of the calling of 70.
One GA we have in our area once asked Elder Maxwell what was Christ’s most redeeming quality. The answer? Submissiveness.
If we go forward in life with pride, thinking our ways are higher than the ways of the prophets, or even the Lord, then we are on the road to apostasy. However, we can ask, and then humbly submit ourselves to whatever decision is given us. In doing so, we become like Christ.
Tim, good comments. And remember, you always have a friend in Jesus….
with elder packer i prefer ‘fourth drift’ to ‘apostasy.’
You know what’s interesting about the iron rod? And I’ve never seen it pointed out by some of the so-called loyal dissenters, because it seems like they don’t actually study the scriptures or words of the prophets. (ya, probably too harsh I know, but frequently their writing just rehashes the same old drivel not founded in latter-day revelation, but popular progressive ideology)
How did Lehi get to the tree? What about Nephi, Sariah and Sam?
If you consider the story, you’ll see that Lehi was brought into a dark and dreary wilderness by either an angel or the Lord. Upon finding himself there and lost, he cried out for mercy and for help. Then he was shown a vision of a tree and the way to go. He took the fruit and was immediately desirous for others to receive the same.
So he called to Nephi, Sariah and Sam and they came to him. He called to Laman and Lemuel and they refused.
No mention of the iron rod until he moves on to describing the other concourses of people. Even the chapter heading gets it wrong and implies that he sees the rod of iron and then Nephi, etc. come and partake. But they come after hearing the patriarch’s/prophet’s voice and following him.
Anyway, I don’t say this to undermine the iron rod, because it’s clear that’s how the vast majority of “us” get to the tree. But apparently some come to the tree from direct revelation, and some come to the tree from hearkening to those who’ve arrived and call for them.
I have no problem with immigration issues. I have some annoyance at the tactics of the so-called intellectual groups and pushing for various degrees of change (not that I disagree with pants or prayers, or even priesthood if it’s God’s will) but the manner of protest completely disrespects existing lines of authority and any sacred revelation or experience I’ve ever had it’s when I was acting while sustaining those lines of authority.
I would have serious issue to see a change regarding gay relationships. Not because I’m a homophobe, in fact, I don’t really care about the sex aspect of it. But because the “capstone” of years of faithful activity to my testimony is revelation centered on the importance and destiny of the family (with a mother and father at the head).
Anything outside of that framework would have to require some serious revelation on the matter for myself. I’m confident this wouldn’t happen though, because I’m confident that what I have received lines up with what God’s servants have received.
Line upon line, would work well to ordain blacks, increase our understanding of the priesthood roles of women, etc. and each of these additions adds to what we have and even makes what we have greater. But establishing different patterns of family relationships isn’t an addition to the family relationship, it’s a replacement. And it’s an inferior one at that. (with sincere apologies to someone who would feel hurt by that, but I do sincerely believe a mother + father family is not only biological ideal, but spiritually and eternally).
I also agree and hope that OD3 is coming soon (or rather I hope it’s D&C 139). I think people read too much into a change in the wording of President Packers talk. If anything, he may have dialed it back again because he was getting antsy in “jumping the gun” on the announcement. We all know the FP and Q12 act slowly and deliberately in these matters. It’s not like every revelation Joseph ever made was immediately enshrined in scripture the next day. And we’ve all (hopefully) been made aware of the scripture which says, ” And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture.” I hope no one is suggesting that the FP and Q12 were not moved upon by the HG in publishing this document or that the many subsequent times Apostles have cited this document that they’re not moved by the HG. It was to this scriptural standard that Pres. Packer made his pronouncement. I have no problem with it, but for issues of clarity, it also makes sense that they say, “Well this isn’t directly added to the book of scriptures you carry around with you, but according to the Lord’s definition it applies.”
Thanks for your great perspective Rame. I worry about the apostasy I see in the Church and some of the dissent that I see among the sisters, it’s affected some in my own family. These members of my family are not happy in the ranks of the dissenting feminists either. I think it’s just more contention, and the Devil trying to pull us all apart. While I try to show compassion toward those that I disagree with, I always encourage them to follow the prophets. And for the record, I have never felt disenchanted because women have not asked to give prayers in Gen Conf. I’d rather hear them speak than pray.
I would like to reiterate that the attitude we take regarding disagreements is the key issue. The Lord encourages free will. He wants us to think critically, be skeptical, question, pray, ponder, etc. He wants us to use our faculties to figure out things. Sometimes this may mean that we express, in a respectful way, our disagreement with a Church policy.
The key issue becomes: when does that disagreement become a stumbling block to our personal advancement. We should know that sometimes we will be tested. One of the key tests is: will we follow the prophets even though sometimes we don’t know the reason for doing so?
Let me mention a small area in my own life. I have a goatee. I love my goatee. Most likely if I were asked to serve on the High Council or in the bishopric or if I were a temple worker I would be asked to shave my goatee. Frankly, I think this rule is a little silly. Who cares if I have a little facial hair? *But I would still shave the goatee if asked to do so.* I can think of no reasonable reason why, as a gospel doctrine teacher, I can have a goatee and why, as a counselor in the bishopric, I could not have a goatee. But I would still do it because *one of the tests for me and everybody else is related to following the guidance of the people in authority in the Church.*
Similar tests apply to the issues of SSM, women and the priesthood, immigration policy and on and on.
the manner of protest completely disrespects existing lines of authority Well, existing lines of authority don’t offer the access to Moses and rapid feedback from God he provided to Zelophehad’s daughters! If there were such easy access to Pres. Monson and he were to provide the quick turn around service Moses did agitation would be quickly put out of business. Activism tends to gain traction in a vacuum.
I hope no one is suggesting that the FP and Q12 were not moved upon by the HG in publishing this document The Family Proc. was created by committee, it may have been an inspired committee but a committee none the less. A committee isn’t involved in thus saith the Lord *revelation*. Revelation is more God than man, inspiration is more man than God and committees produce more Camels than horses.
I appreciate the message and tone of the original posting — in the comments, some express a hope that the Proclamation on the Family will become OD3 — I don’t — I appreciate the Proclamation for what it is, just as so with all the other proclamations the brethren have issued over the years — but I don’t want us to start canonizing man-made (true, but still man-made) doctrinal essays. The Proclamation is a powerful statement, and it gains nothing by making it OD3 except that it then becomes a club with which to bash others. I’m content with leaving it status alone.
But if it is offered for a vote, and the Church as a whole chooses to adopt it, I’ll go along with the crowd — I’ll vote against it, but I’ll accept the affirmative vote as binding on me as a member of the Church.
ji – that’s just a strange way to think about it. The FP and the Q12 aren’t in the habit of making doctrinal essays pronounced to the world. And I’m not trying to marginalize you here, but I’m just baffled that someone who would consider themselves in good standing would see an entire essay jointly written by the FP and Q12 and vote against it (if given the opportunity).
I can’t imagine “voting against” a conference talk, let alone a proclamation to all the world from God’s only authorized servants to all the world.
I realize you and significant handful of others disagree with me on this matter, but it’s just baffling to the rest of the traditional church members, and a very good indicator of where the divide is.
I do respect the fact that the church very very rarely (if ever) in recent times makes use of the “whipping stick”, as it were, to whip people (rhetorically) back in line. Instead, the church leaders, like God, want us to come to our own conclusions after they provide us with God’s revealed light on an issue. So in that light, I could see why the Proclamation wouldn’t be given even further status. The light and knowledge is there, and it’s up to you to receive your own revelation on it.
But it’s just strange for me to see people insisting it’s mostly of men, some inspiration, mingled with biased reasoning, etc.
RT @Millennialstar: The Coming Apostasy: Periodically, the world lurches through serious changes. When it does, it forces people t… h …
These issues are certainly among the “mighty winds…hail…and storm” surrounding us. And many more of them will surface on the way. The key is to make sure we find ourselves on the sure foundation of Christ and His prophets. The internet and the exchange of ideas, even “false educational ideas,” contributes to apostasy of individuals. Scouring through the Bloggernacle has opened my eyes to many issues and ideas I never considered before, but I’ve been careful not to swallow every well-reasoned/researched argument. Facts can be easily disguised and manipulated to give cause for doubt and hiccups in one’s faith. I have an RM friend whose testimony was left in shambles in his relentless search for “truth” until he lost all faith–yes, ALL faith–in Christ. Besides, it didn’t help that he wasn’t living the gospel, while carrying a constant undercurrent of disagreement with Church leadership in light of his “discoveries.” Peter, the Rock, told Christ he would never deny Him, and proceeded to do exactly that three times. But he was still called to lead the Church. We cannot know the full truth of all things, nor can we “bear all things now” but I am assured that our prophet’s voice–when he speaks authoritatively–and His voice are the same.
I’m with ji. I hope there is no movement to canonize the POF and if there is a vote called for this weekend, I will vote against it. But, I don’t think there will be any such vote. Something would have been leaked about it by now, just as Denver Snuffer leaked the female missionary age change before it was announced.
Chris,
I didn’t say I oppose the Proclamation on the Family — I don’t. I just don’t want in canonized.
Similarly, I wouldn’t want to canonize all the proclamations that have been previously made — there have been several, you know. I don’t object to any of them, and all of them served their purpose.
It’s sort of like in politics — some people want to amend the U. S. Constitution to reflect their views on the issue of the day — I don’t — even if I agree with a political matter, I am resistant to approving it as a constitutional amendment — statute, that’s fine — administrative regulation, that’s fine — court decision, that’s fine — constitutional amendment, well, I need to think long and hard on it. I really wouldn’t want to change our canon unless God himself had something to do with it.
I believe in Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ Hope in the Lord Jesus Christ, and Charity in the Lord Jesus Christ. And I believe all that God has revealed and that he yet will reveal many great and important things. And I uphold the First Presidency and other brethren with my faith and prayers. There’s no divide between me and traditional church leaders.
Regarding the club or whipping stick — I’m not concerned about the Church as an institution — I’m far more concerned about individual members.
The current debate in the world concerning homosexuals given equal marriage rights brings to mind a prophecy given by Heber C Kimball,
“Salt Lake Will be classified among the wicked cities of the world. A spirit of speculation and extravagance will take possession of the Saints, and the result will be financial bondage.
Persecution comes next, and all true Latter-day Saints will be tested to the limit. Many will apostatize, and others will stand still, not knowing what to do. ‘Darkness will cover the earth and gross darkness the minds of the people.” (quoted in Prophecy, Crowther, pg 26)
It is my personal opinion that the current recession was the result of speculation and overspending on the part of the world’s nations and the Saints as well, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_Great_Recession). Also we are seeing the rise of the homosexual agenda to allow same sex marriage. Already the majority of the US agrees they should be afforded this right and other nations are following suite. It not surprising to see more and more LDS members agreeing with allowing same sex marriage. As rameumptom has stated, “the Church has established a line in the sand” and this is causing some of the saints to apostatize and others to “stand still, not knowing what to do.”
Please do not attack. I have a sincere question about the Elder Featherstone story. So the way I understand it is members are to put up with abuses of authority(at all levels from the (First Presidency on down the line) because it is a test from God? So God purposefully allows abuse in the church and does not allow anyone or higher authorities to address this issue, for His purposes?! So all members are to put up with abuse, stay quiet. (Not what Joseph Smith taught.)
Isn’t there a prophecy that the church itself would be in apostacy in the last days? (because of unrighteous dominion of leaders among other things) And that Christ will have to set the church right again and cleanse it?
JRSG,
No, we are to prayerfully determine the will of God in everything in our lives. In Elder Featherstone’s case, the Lord told him to submit. There is a chain of command for dealing with issues, also, if it merits it. The thing is, there is no problem with us asking the Lord’s servants to consider something. It is when we have the attitude that they have become the enemy, when we are so filled with pride that we think we are smarter than they are, that we have a problem.
It was Jesus that taught us the importance of submitting to God’s will. I think we could all follow his humility a little more in this time of coming apostasy.
“It was Jesus that taught us the importance of submitting to God’s will. I think we could all follow his humility a little more in this time of coming apostasy.”
Amen to that. What I find most disturbing about the feminist and “gay marriage” supporters is a lack of humility.They are so concerned by what the world thinks and what they think that God doesn’t even come into the picture. I will give Howard some credit in acknowledging spiritual issues; even if I disagree with his conclusions, proposed actions, and views on the leadership. The rest are just following the modern liberal playbook as if performing some kind of childish (vs. childlike) tantrum or overgrown teenage rebellion.
Many, if not most, scholars believe Judas Iscariot was seeking a Messiah who would arrange the armies of Israel and kick Rome out of the country. Judas betrayed Jesus in hope that this would force him to take his role as the Davidic/King Messiah. When Jesus acted submissively and quietly, Judas realized it didn’t work and killed himself.
Many members think they can “steady the ark” and are justified in doing so. They see something that isn’t done the way they want it done, and it then behooves them to rock the boat, thinking they are fixing the problem.
The difference between the faithful who ask for something, and those heading to apostasy is the level of humility/submissive versus pride/defiance. It is Satan that stirs up the hearts of men to anger, not God. “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth” is not a bumper sticker.
Watching Saturday morning General Conference, we can see that the Brethren DO listen, as they had the very first sister say a prayer in a regular General Conference. I do not think the “dismayed” sister nor others should be so harsh on the General Authorities, but ask in hope and patience.
RAM, according to the Church, they had already made the decision to let a woman pray before the agitation even started… Let’s not let the facts be changed lest the faithless take courage in their deception…
I love being an apostate. The world is so much clearer now.
h_nu,
I was made aware of that fact AFTER I posted. It seems the Brethren are very in touch with what is going on, and considerate of the desires of the sisters. It still shows that there is no reason for any sister to be “dismayed” that a bunch of old white men are determining her happiness in the Church.
As I listened to Conference yesterday, I noted that some of the statements made in the Saturday morning and Priesthood sessions seem to agree with my post. Glad to see I’m occasionally on the same wave-length as they are.
Pingback: Lehi, King Benjamin, and President Monson On Why We Follow the Prophet | Gently Hew Stone
While it was very pleasing to have two women pray at this last General Conference, I didn’t find it an earth shattering event. Women have been giving talks at GC for some time now, and I find this to be far more important. I’m also rather pleased that the decision about the prayers was made BEFORE the letter writing campaign. I very comfortable with members praying to Heavenly Father about change, I am NOT comfortable with a letter writing campaign.
Amen Margaret Joseph.