But General Conference shows us how to judge current fads in the world, shows us what really works, shows us how to avoid the traps of the world.

Nothing in the world has nearly the relevance of General Conference. It’s my spiritual checkup and spiritual guide in a world of confusion.

And of course that’s part of my point, is it fair that only those who can sugar-coat are allowed to question?

Using this discussion as an example, how is one to raise the issue of dis-connect with GC without fear of being labeled “testimony lacking” etc.? IMO the inability to raise issues fosters an even greater disconnect. Personally, I don’t think I could have attached my name to a post such as your’s, although I feel very much the same way.

BTW, your recipe must have been a little off judging by some of the response ;>) Although I read it as a sincere issue asked with an eye of faith.

I this these comments uncover a larger issue, namely, how do we as members of the church faithfully pose problems that we have, without being “othered” by those who do not share the problem?

The optmists assert that there is room for questioning as long as it’s done “in a spirit of faith”. This is roughly defined as incorporating a sense of humility when questioning. In other words, one must pose the question in a non-threatening manner, be open to the fact the he/she could be wrong, and reflect a series of other listening and communication skills. The problem that I have with this line of discussion is that it limits those who can “faithfully” question to the individuals with a specific skill set that in the end may or may not be related to humility. This is to say that the only people who can express their concerns are those with the ability to express them according to a narrow pedagogy, which in the end few members posess.

I of course have many more thoughts on the matter, but I’d like to see if anyone is interested in pursuing the topic before continuing.

Conference illustrates for me one of the greatest problems facing the Church today–a failure to actually apply Gospel principles to relevant, real-world situations. The teachings of Christ are not only necessary in today’s world, but can provide critical guidance in all kinds of situations.

But what do we get at Conference? Platitudes. Most talks are nothing but fluffy “feel good” pieces that don’t enrich understanding, teach important lessons, or provide Gospel context for understanding/rising above the world. Sure, it’s nice to hear that honesty is good, or that Christ’s sacrifice is wondrous.

But what do those things mean for us? For teenagers, or senior citizens, or new members, or inactive members? The last Ensign brought this problem home, too. The vocabulary lessons were spot-on, useful and relevant. But the big Q&A was “I feel nervous about bearing my testimony?” My wife has never shared her testimony on a fast Sunday in the 4 years she’s been a member, and her discipleship is none the worse for it. She had (and does have) bigger questions about her place in the Gospel than how to deal with public speaking.

I woke him up for President Monson’s talk because I knew there would be a few good stories. (BTW, is it just me, or has President Monson has given that “duty” talk several times?)

After the meeting I asked him how he had liked it. He said that 2 hours was a long time, and I had to agree. He said he particularly liked Elder Monson’s talk, and I just smiled.

2. I liked Elder Ballard’s exhortation that we “eliminate guilt,” and his observation that sometimes some of us inappropriatly emphasize Church work to the detriment of employment and family life. I hope those comments remain in the printed verion (this sentence is in jest, for those who cannot tell).

3. Elder Bednar’s point that people “choose” to be offended is, of course, true. But I am concerned that if too many of us take this too literally, and state this too bluntly to our nonparticipating brothers and sisters, we will only assure that they continue in their estrangement from the Church for a much longer period. I prefer Elder Wirthlin’s approach with respect to people who have been offended, as set forth in his talk about kindness. In that case, in a visit to a brother who had been offended long ago and had since then stayed away, Elder Wirthlin told him that the incident was very unfortunate, and that “[a]fter 40 years, it’s time the Church made things right.” Joseph B. Wirthlin, “The Virtue of Kindness,” Ensign, May 2005, 26

For people in good emotional health, a sense of offense may largely be a matter of choice, and forgiveness and letting go, a relatively easy exercise of will power. But not all of us are in such good emotional health, and hopefully the Church is a place where those of us who feel spiritually or emotionally wounded may find peace and healing.

4. I believe the first version of Elder Poelman’s talk was correct, and that there is an important distinction between the gospel and the Church. I would add that there is an important distinction between God and His Church (and His leaders). It bothers me that a number of Brethren are reluctant to acknowledge this in a straightforward way.

5. Like several others, I find the long periods of listening to conference more tolerable when, like my wife, I multitask, doing other things with the conference talks as backdrop (kind of like doing my homework while listening to the radio and eating a snack when I was growing up). I think it would help things if the priesthood session, like the YW or RS sessions, were moved to another weekend, so we only had 4 hours on Saturday.

6. I find I can respond to conference in a more healthy way by following the adage of 12 step meetings, that we “take what we can use and leave the rest”; the same is true of priesthood leadership meetings, gospel doctrine classes, and even Sacrament meetings. I can acknowledge that I do not, and will probably never, measure up, but that is okay, that is why there is a Savior. (See Elder Oaks opening talk.)

But I also used to cringe when David Haight used to just ramble. You can’t tell me his talks were pre-written and correlated. Ugh. Give me a Neal Maxwell or Jeffrey Holland well-turned phrase over a David Haight trip down memory lane.