New First Presidency of the church

Public forum for those seeking support for their experience in the LDS Church.
User avatar
mom3
Posts: 3588
Joined: 02 Apr 2011, 14:11

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by mom3 » 17 Jan 2018, 11:14

No matter how we slice this - I am so unhappy. This was what I feared in the interim week. My worst fears didn't totally play out. But I knew Uchtdorf wouldn't be kept in.

Even though many people are holding out hope that "at least he will speak in Conference" there is no guarantee on that that either. He can easily be back seated without a blink.

I am grieving this more than the loss of President Monson. Strangely enough my devout Mom is also. It's not just middle wayers who found joy in the Silver Fox.
"I stayed because it was God and Jesus Christ that I wanted to follow and be like, not individual human beings." Chieko Okazaki Dialogue interview

"I am coming to envision a new persona for the Church as humble followers of Jesus Christ....Joseph and his early followers came forth with lots of triumphalist rhetoric, but I think we need a new voice, one of humility, friendship and service. We should teach people to believe in God because it will soften their hearts and make them more willing to serve." - Richard Bushman

GBSmith
Posts: 967
Joined: 24 Apr 2010, 08:51

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by GBSmith » 17 Jan 2018, 11:34

I recall back in the day when Marion D. Hanks was "sidelined" and the talk was that it was because he had become to popular. I fear that in part this might be the reason for Elder Uchtdorf's release from the presidency.

User avatar
DarkJedi
Posts: 5985
Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 20:53

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by DarkJedi » 17 Jan 2018, 11:40

That is a good point GBS. As you allude to and Mom points out, DFU is popular among the general membership because he's a good speaker and he's sincere among other things. I never feel like he's a parrot. I have even said jokingly that if DFU wanted to start his own church I'd be one of the first in line.
In the absence of knowledge or faith there is always hope.

Once there was a gentile...who came before Hillel. He said "Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot." Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it."

My Introduction

User avatar
LookingHard
Posts: 2860
Joined: 20 Oct 2014, 12:11

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by LookingHard » 17 Jan 2018, 11:47

Maybe DFU should contact Denver Snuffer and say, "Hey, I know you don't vant to be the leader of your movement, but I am willing and capable. Lets do it together!" :D

User avatar
DarkJedi
Posts: 5985
Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 20:53

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by DarkJedi » 17 Jan 2018, 12:34

LookingHard wrote:
17 Jan 2018, 11:47
Maybe DFU should contact Denver Snuffer and say, "Hey, I know you don't vant to be the leader of your movement, but I am willing and capable. Lets do it together!" :D
:lol: Yeah, except I don't think Snuffer is on track. At least I could follow DFU.
In the absence of knowledge or faith there is always hope.

Once there was a gentile...who came before Hillel. He said "Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot." Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it."

My Introduction

squarepeg
Posts: 109
Joined: 17 Feb 2017, 12:51

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by squarepeg » 17 Jan 2018, 12:43

DarkJedi wrote:
17 Jan 2018, 11:40
I have even said jokingly that if DFU wanted to start his own church I'd be one of the first in line.
I'd say it un-jokingly!

I feel so much unconditional love from Uchtdorf when he speaks to us. Not so for me with Nelson or Oaks. I would readily follow the love.

Was reading some Dalai Lama quotes this morning, feeling the love, and was wishing he was one of our GAs (although not really, because it'd kind of ruin him). Uchtdorf is much closer to the Dalai Lama than Oaks or Nelson....like, "Here, have some love, and spread it to others....no militant rulebook and no strings attached."

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16061
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by Curt Sunshine » 17 Jan 2018, 12:50

Thanks, OON, for that additional information. I don't know why I thought the trend had been to put the most senior apostles in the FP. Memories are funny things and often unreliable.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

AmyJ
Posts: 716
Joined: 27 Jul 2017, 05:50

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by AmyJ » 17 Jan 2018, 12:55

mom3 wrote:
17 Jan 2018, 11:14
I am grieving this more than the loss of President Monson.
I feel the same way. I mean I knew that this day would come eventually - President Monson was getting up in age. And if I thought about it, I knew the hope was thin that they would keep DFU in the presidency. But still... it is not a comfortable feeling.

User avatar
nibbler
Posts: 3702
Joined: 14 Nov 2013, 07:34
Location: Ten miles west of the exact centre of the universe

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by nibbler » 17 Jan 2018, 13:04

squarepeg wrote:
17 Jan 2018, 12:43
Was reading some Dalai Lama quotes this morning, feeling the love, and was wishing he was one of our GAs (although not really, because it'd kind of ruin him).
:lol:

We need to get a thread started on that question and answer session they had with the press. It's full of :shock: :crazy: :shock: moments that mostly sap my enthusiasm.
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold
-Jesus

squarepeg
Posts: 109
Joined: 17 Feb 2017, 12:51

Re: New First Presidency of the church

Post by squarepeg » 17 Jan 2018, 13:32

nibbler wrote:
17 Jan 2018, 13:04

:lol:

We need to get a thread started on that question and answer session they had with the press. It's full of :shock: :crazy: :shock: moments that mostly sap my enthusiasm.
Man, that was something, wasn't it!? I felt like Pres Nelson had no idea what any of the concerns were even about, and Pres Oaks knows what they're all about but doesn't care one iota.

Woman asks, "What about women?" First Presidency be like, "We LOVE women! They make such good mothers!"

I'm sitting there thinking, ok, but NOT all women will be mothers, and if the only ways women contribute to the church are by raising boys and giving advice to our husbands, I'm not sure anyone in their right mind would say that makes us equal in power to men. Men can, after all, be fathers and they can also give advice to their wives...AND they have Priesthood authority, sooo.... And if women held the Priesthood and could hold some of these callings that currently are male-exclusive, men could play more of a role in raising their children, rather than realizing in their 80s that all that their kids are and have done they owe to their wives because they themselves were so busy fulfilling church responsibilities when their kids were growing up, they hardly knew them. How is this all not obvious? It's very simple logic.

Imagine if things were flipped and women held the Priesthood and men didn't. The female First Presidency is all, "Right, men don't hold the Priesthood. We love men, they make such good fathers! What would we do without them to give us advice and to raise up daughters to run the church someday!?" Who is going to say, "Oh, yeah, that sounds really reasonable! Great answer!"?

*facepalm*

Post Reply