I don't know about that; there are some members that didn't like having the high priests and Elders quorums combined and I think discouraging the use of Mormon or LDS as identifiers and telling people to use the full name instead or "the restored Church of Jesus Christ" will definitely annoy some Church members and even add weight to their shelf if Nelson keeps pushing this idea. After seeing some of the leaked leadership videos and documents I'm not convinced that they really have a very good idea what will cause members to stay in the Church or leave in the first place.SilentDawning wrote: ↑01 Oct 2018, 08:25With the exception of the November policy, I don't think these changes will tick off people. They are all changes that people seemed to embrace. A lot of people thought Scouts was a racket when it comes to fees etcetera. I don't know if he unilaterally makes these kinds of decisions without thought for the membership, but I know growth in membership and activation/retention is a huge issue for them. I honestly don't think they will enact policies that cause a bloodletting as a result -- if it happens, it will be due to poor judgment.DevilsAdvocate wrote: ↑01 Oct 2018, 07:21It actually wouldn't surprise me if Nelson rolled out some new policy changes and/or "revelations" that would be especially hard for many Church members to accept. Just look at what he has already done so far. This is the same guy that publicly doubled down on the November policy, abandoned scouts, combined the high priests and Elders quorums, changed home/visiting teaching to "ministering" and publicly discouraged the use of Mormon and LDS after the recent "I'm a Mormon" advertising campaign and so many Church websites already used these terms.
Basically it looks like if Nelson thinks something is a good idea for whatever reasons then he is typically going to just go ahead and do it without worrying much if at all about how many members will react to it, all the implications and possible unintended side effects of it, etc. To me there is no question Nelson is capable of making major negative or difficult changes and the more interesting question is what kind of changes could be seriously under consideration that could actually cause very many Church members to leave? As far as the two hour block rumor I think it has gotten to the point where now many Church members will be disappointed if it doesn't happen.
An example of how Nelson has done things so far is the announcement of a temple in Russia. The Church didn't actually have official plans to build a temple in Russia. The government in Russia has already cracked down on the LDS Church to some extent and even more so against the Jehovah's Witnesses so it hardly seems like a very stable environment to promise a temple. What happens if there still isn't any temple there 20 years from now?
To be fair I think they actually are concerned about it but it looks like they don't really know what to do about it and they have painted themselves into a corner to some extent with claims about prophets and revelation, how the "gospel" doesn't change, etc.