Saturday Evening Priesthood Session

Belatedly, here’s the thread.

Elder  Neil L. Anderson and Elder Steven Snow have just addressed us–I’m catching up now.

Brother Larry M. Gibson, First Counselor of the YM General Presidency

Keys of presidency–deacons’ quorum presidents get them, too.  (I’m still not going to start calling my son “President”).

Duties of a deacon:  appointed to watch over and be a standing minister to the Church, assists the teacher in all his duties, warn, expound, exhort and teach, and invite all to come unto Christ.

Deacon’s literal interpretation of the injunction to “preside over twelve deacons” leads to faith-full attempt to reach out to all the deacon-aged boys in his ward boundaries.

“Priesthood” means reaching out to serve others.   TSM:  “The priesthood is not really so much a gift as it is a commission to serve…”

Service is the very foundation of the priesthood–service to others as exemplified by the Savior.

You wonderful young men hold the Aaronic Priesthood restored by John the Baptist to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery near Harmony, PA.  Your priesthood holds the sacred keys that open the door for all of Heavenly Father’s children to come unto His Son, Jesus Christ, and follow Him. …You truly are ministers who must be clean, worthy, and faithful priesthood men at all times and in all places.


President Dieter F. Uchtdorf

Sorry, I can’t see his tie.

Are priesthood holders living below their privileges when it comes to the sacred power, gifts, and blessings that are their opportunity and right as bearers of God’s priesthood?

The blessings of the priesthood transcend our ability to comprehend. …The fact that Heavenly Father would entrust this power and responsibility to man is evidence of His great love for us and a foreshadowing of our potential as sons of God in the hereafter.

…we can partake of an abundant feast of spiritual opportunity and universal priesthood blessings.

[I can’t help noting that this language contrasts rather dramatically with the insistence that priesthood is merely of vehicle for service that we have recently heard]

Too often, we attend meetings and nod our heads; we might even smile knowingly and agree.  We may say to ourselves “That is something I will do.”  But somewhere between the hearing, the writing of a reminder on our smart phone, and the actual doing, our “do it” switch gets rotated to the “later” position.  Brethren, let’s make sure to set our “do it” switch to the “now” position!

First:  Read the Owner’s Manual!

If you owned the world’s most advanced and expensive computer, would you use it merely as a desk ornament?  It is only when you study the owner’s manual, learn how to use the software, and turn on the power that you can access its full potential.

The holy priesthood of God also has an owner’s manual  Let us commit to reading the scriptures and handbooks with more purpose and focus.

Second:  Seek the Revelations of the Spirit

A sure testimony of Jesus Christ and of His restored gospel takes more than knowledge–it requires personal revelation.  Joseph Smith explained that the priesthood is a “channel through which the Almighty commenced revealing his glory at the beginning of the creation of this earth, and through which He has continued to reveal Himself to the children of men to the present time.”

Revelation and testimony do not always come with overwhelming force.

Third:  find Joy in Priesthood Service

During my career as an airline pilot, [FINALLY!!] I had the opportunity to be a check and training captain.  Part of this job was to train and test experienced pilots to ensure that they had the necessary knowledge and skills to operate those magnificent big jets.

Some pilots were still enthusiastic, some just going through the motions.  Are you merely going through the motions as a priesthood holder?

As bearers of the priesthood, let us never become hardened to the wonder and awe of what the Lord has entrusted to us.


President Henry B. Eyring:  Learning in the Priesthood

I found three wonderful things to speed my growth in the priesthood. The first was a president who knew how to sit in council with the members of his quorum.  The second was great faith in Jesus Christ that led to great love for each other.  And the third was a shared conviction that our overarching priesthood purpose was to labor for the salvation of men.

[Sorry–wi-fi is spotty; I’ll fill in tomorrow. Discuss away!!]


  1. Philmon says:


  2. Romney 2012 Supporter says:

    Thanks for this thread.

  3. Romney 2012 Supporter says:

    My stake center has free wi-fi

  4. Did the YW get their own thread last week??

  5. Aaron B says:

    I’ve saved up so much snark over the past 40 minutes, I don’t know how I can ever type it all!

  6. Romney 2012 Supporter says:

    I see over on the sideblog some smart-aleck has a GC closed thread. LOL

  7. Philmon says:
  8. Romney 2012 Supporter says:


    thanks for sharing that after I get into my Sunday best and drive to my stake center

  9. Positions with keys in the ward: Deacon President, Teachers President, Bishop, and Janitor.

  10. I don’t like the iPad version as well either. I was on my phone before, but am now on the iPad.

  11. Time to sing. Can’t figure out the refresh on this iPad version, other than to post another comment.

  12. Romney 2012 Supporter says:

    Rob switch to the normal version by clicking on the link at the bottom

  13. Jared T. says:

    So glad this is streaming! Love technology.

  14. Chad Too says:

    That hymn was keyed way too low for my taste.

  15. That seemed slow. I do love singing with the body of the priesthood though.

  16. I was wondering where this was. Kristine must have been caught up in the Butler game.

  17. I love the iPad version…though not as much as I love Pres. Uchtdorf!

  18. How did he know we all had smartphones??

  19. Romney 2012 Supporter says:

    IPad version is terrible

  20. Wait…I am supposed to do it and not just blog about it…this is rough.

  21. I don’t know that I’ve ever used the owners manual for a computer. . .

  22. Romney 2012 Supporter says:

    Elder Uchdorf hasn’t said what exactly we are supposed to dO

  23. Homework?? Read 20, 84, 107 and 121. I think I will email all my young men next Sunday who have completed this assignment.

  24. Romney– that’s because the spirit will reveal it unto you.

  25. Do we need to be told exactly what to do?

  26. Chris–my teenage children do.

  27. Finally, the obligatory pilot story.

  28. Is Elder Uchdorf talking?? or its another conference?

  29. Worldly anchors…nice.

  30. Romney 2012 Supporter says:

    I like specifics and General Conference is heavy on generalities.

  31. Luis– yes. And his tie was a soft blue tonight.

  32. Eyting seems to be opening off script. And I love it.

  33. Tough neighborhood, awesome.

  34. Romney,

    I love the abstract. Works for me.

  35. Take note over-ambitious missionaries – even Elder Eyering can make excuses.

  36. thesmoth7 says:

    Going back a bit did neil andersen slam on jimmer

  37. No slamming of Jimmer. There was a shout out to BYU basketball.

  38. No jimmer slams that I heard.

    Lots of instruction to the YM tonight it seems. An we usually get 2 apostles from the quorum of the 12 in priesthood. Only 1 tonight, leaving 6 for tomorrow.

  39. thesmith7 says:

    I thought his story of Sid was to counter jimmer not going on a mission

  40. I do not think that was his intent. The last three speakers tonight did not serve missions.

  41. If a General Authority chose to rebuke a member – there are more appropriate ways to do it than publicly shame them in priesthood meeting. In other words, I doubt that was the intent.

  42. thesmith7 says:

    Looks like we need to do our priesthood ” duty”

  43. Agree with B. Russ.

  44. We haven’t been reminded to avoid pornography yet…maybe it’s not a problem anymore?

  45. We filled the building…..thanks to the Florida Gators.

  46. Romney 2012 Supporter says:

    Speaking of filling the building… I think there were some empty seats in the afternoon session.

  47. 44 – either that or someone finally realized that every time someone mentions pornography, every person in attendance thinks of pornography – leading to record breaking levels of pornography usage.

    If this is the case – yay for that person who realized this fact!

  48. Cameron– you spoke too soon.

  49. The moral compass of society used to be more tolerant of spousal/child abuse, racism, and misogyny. I don’t think society’s moral compass being in line with the church’s should be viewed as a necessarily good thing.

  50. What is the “marriageable age” exactly? He should give us a number. I nominate 25.

  51. Porter, see comments 25 and 34.

  52. Brett H says:

    I think young single adults should be allowed to bring a date to the priesthood session. That would save them from spending yet another weekend night with only men.

  53. Kids aren’t getting married – its the men’s fault.

    Kids are getting divorced – its the men’s fault.

  54. Romney 2012 Supporter says:


    The ladies would then miss their Girls Night Out

  55. I should mention, I don’t know a multitude of divorcees, but in the ones I am familiar with it is rarely that the women are innocent parties trying desperately to make the marriage work. Actually, I’ve never seen that be the case.

  56. Monsoon seems much happier than last fall. I like that.

  57. Wow. A mention of un-salvageable marriages. Good for him.

  58. He only hears the women’s side of these cancellation requests because they are the ones who always ask. Men don’t need it, then can be sealed to multiple women.

  59. Not so, porter. Divorced men still have to be cleared for a new sealing — i.e., they need to make their case, too, if they have one.

  60. Princeton doesn’t seem like a tough neighborhood, but I admit that our times did not intersect.

  61. Ron Madson says:

    Another admonition to not look at pornography! I need to re-start my new year’s resolution again!

  62. I have to say, it was quite thought provoking to hear Pres. Monson say that he has to deal with sealing cancellations WEEKLY. No, I’m not in denial about it. I just think it’s sad.

  63. Ardis,

    Busting into the priesthood thread. What a rebel!

  64. Would that make Kristine Che Guevara for creating the post?

  65. Ron Madson says:

    During my several years of priesthood counseling re: marriage and twenty years handling some LDS divorces, my personal experience is that it was as much if not more the “men” doing all they could to save a marriage. Maybe my experiences are the aberration, but I would say it was as much as three out of four the women “lost their love” or wanted out–and many had their boyfriend in the wings.

  66. Rob, any divorce is sad, but if he only has to deal with 52 cancellations a year, I’d say thats pretty amazing. Last I heard (which was data from around ten years ago) temple divorces were still around 5%.

  67. @55- B. Russ- I have. But it’s rare.

  68. Yeah. Like I said, I don’t know tons of divorcees. If I knew you, I believe I’d know one example of that scenario.

    Of the people I do know (well) who are divorced, its usually the scenario Ron describes in 65.

  69. Ron:

    I’m currently in a marriage that at least partially agrees with your scenario. My wife is on the precipice of wanting out – not because I’m unworthy, not because I’m addicted to porn (which I’m not, btw), not because I’m a bad husband, or father – but because I don’t agree with the church on everything. My views today are simply not the same as they were when we married 10 years ago, and they exist in ways my wife simply isn’t kosher with. To her, it’s more important to be in line with the church on everything than it is to keep a marriage together. To her, the hierarchy or allegience goes like this: God -> Church -> Family.

    So, if a husband (me) disagrees with some of the teachings of the church (i.e. “Follow the prophet”, the prophet simply cannot lead the church astray, or perhaps that not every word spoken in General Conference, or that the words of Christ take precedence over the living prophet, or that the 14 fundamentals isn’t scriptural, or that church finances should be transparent, etc), then my wife feels justified in dissolving the marriage because to her the Church and the Gospel are the same. Try as I might to show how scripture would disagree with that notion, there are enough conflations given in Church, in General Conference or the Ensign to create discord where none should exist.

    So, though it might happen that men are sucky and deserve divorce, I would like to add mine to the pile of guys who are at least trying to hold it together where there’s at least an implicit understanding that it’s OK to throw the husband to the wayside. Maybe this is part of the effect of having a church leadership believe that God’s love is conditional, maybe something else… but I do agree with your conclusions.

  70. P.S. Ron: if my wife knew I agreed with your assertions on D&C 98 in the face of what church leaders say, or in the face of what our sworn allegiance to the articles of faith dictate, then that would simply be another straw that would help tip the scales.

    Of all the ills I see of orthodoxy, perhaps the worst is that it creates a world view where no discord is acceptable, where dissidents – no matter how faithful they might be – are simply unwanted, unneeded and unwelcome. My wife is about as orthodox as she could be when it comes to the church. I appreciate her viewpoint because there is good in orthodoxy, but I also see some of the seedier sides that are problematic.

    So, though I love Josh and your addresses at Claremont and the voices I raise, I can likewise attest to the fact that there are many members who simply won’t give them the time of day because they do disagree with church leadership and the “party line.”

  71. [Should read: … and the voices they raise … ]

    I’m done now.

  72. I actually think it was a slam on Jimmer. The shout out to BYU basketball seemed silly at first, but as the talk progressed it seemed subtly ironic (he’s comparing the decision about a mission on the part of someone with the chance to play for the best rugby team in the world to that of someone who can play basketball in provo). I honestly think it was a subtle message to young men that Jimmer Fredette is not a role model.

    Also, President E’s off the cuff humor was seriously hilarious. Surprisingly excellent comic timing and delivery.

  73. Put the intellectual pride aside for a year and try and make it work. You want her to give in, but are unwilling to do so yourself. I assume you writing this here meant you were open to free advice. I agree she shouldn’t leave you either way.

  74. Duke of Earl Grey says:

    There was Frank. He went to prison. And there was Petey. He went to prison. It was a tough neighborhood.

  75. Duke–That was the best line of the whole meeting tonight.

  76. Thomas Parkin says:

    I think GAs should pretty much stay out of making generalities where so so much is individual and personal. I feel that triply for ignormusses commenting on blogs.

  77. Shouldn’t the ones going to prison be the people we bring the gospel to?

    Maybe that’s not how it was intended. But when everyone was laughing it came across to me as: “Hahaha. He’s trying to share the gospel but turns out he was surrounded by people who we don’t want in our club.”

  78. It’s interesting how people tend to hear what they believe before they hear.

  79. Interesting how some people can read minds.

  80. Ron Madson says:

    #69, Nobody, I hear ya…and you have my empathy for your situation. Very well said and oddly, as you expressed, our misunderstood beliefs/doctrine can create misguided church loyalties which much too often results in seemingly unsolvable wedges in marriages—the very alienation the church organization ostensibly exists to prevent—the church being the means to an end and not to be the end in and of itself when it comes to eternal relations—we should IMO be more married to our spouse then the church…and I do not think our leaders would disagree…but many do not see it that way I suppose…
    and thanks for the shout out as to the Claremont Conference. It was very enjoyable and I felt totally free to speak my mind there. Richard Bushman and those in charge created that atmosphere.

    #73 Many I know in “Nobody’s” situation give in all the time and live with degrees of cognitive dissonance, so I would not assume that he is “unwilling” to give in and shelf a great deal. But I do not disagree in principle with your advice.

    #68 B.Russ, do you think it is a generational thing? ie, that it might have been “that way” in previous generations when a divorce occurred but not now? I am not sure it is fair to stereotype each divorce as being presumptively the man that is the one wanting out and not striving?? I don’t know?

  81. #79 – JT, I was including myself in “people”. No mind reading; it just takes reading differing conclusions about the exact same words and realizing I do it, as well.

  82. Yeah, nice save.

  83. Thomas Parkin (76) FTW

    Ron (80) I don’t know which generation would be the previous generation for you. But yeah, I think previously men had all the mobility and felt free to come or go in a relationship whereas women felt much less free to leave for economic reasons. Nowadays its much more realistic for a woman to be able to leave. If nothing else, I’m sure this could factor into a possible generational difference.
    Add that mobility to decades of hearing how much men are perverted scum, and women are angelic, spiritual, and the closest thing to godliness . . .

  84. Regarding the “generational thing” in views on men/women, marriage and divorce: I am an old guy in a high priests group of old guys. When the topic of marriage and gender gets discussed, my campadres agree almost universally–in their speech at least–that women are better and more spiritual than men, less capable of sinning, less at fault when marriages dissolve, etc. Because I’ve spent a long career as a psychologist and also been involved in numerous church disciplinary councils, I think differently: my experience has been that men and women are both equally capable of sinning, at fault in contributing to dissolution of marriages, etc., but they often do it in different ways. It’s worth noting that my priesthood group brothers who protest the loudest that women are superior to men have mostly never had women supervisors at work, or even women as equals in the workplace. In other words, I think it’s mostly “lip service” and they have an antiquated view that is very much a product of their religious culture and generation.

  85. “Put the intellectual pride aside for a year and try and make it work. You want her to give in, but are unwilling to do so yourself. I assume you writing this here meant you were open to free advice. I agree she shouldn’t leave you either way.”

    What you call “intellectual pride” I might assert is quite different. Am I not allowed to have an opinion? And, then, when that opinion is asked, am I to lie or am I to share it honestly? And, when shared honestly, if I’m attacked verbally do I then shelve my “pride” because I’m clearly in the wrong in your eyes?

    To be fair, this has been going on already for over a year. The more I submit or shelve (disclaimer: my opinion), the more I’m asked to submit or shelve with total disregard for everything done up to that point. I go out of my way to avoid the conversations I know she and I disagree on, and have been seen comments which are calculated to provoke a response out of me numerous times. That is one of the issues with orthodoxy as I see it. The more I give, the more my wife “connects the dots” [in her mind] to the idea that I’m wrong, and she’s right. Therefore she demands more and gives none, sending me to my local priesthood leaders (scheduling meetings for me behind my back) and asking them to directly correct my “weird beliefs.” Then, when I go and talk to them, they say nothing, which sets my wife off even more.

    So, I’m not airing it here to ask for your advice, but rather to give Ron (and others) another evidence of someone going through what he alluded to previously.

  86. I want to qualify my comments 55 and 68. I didn’t mean to say that I don’t know of any divorces that were the men’s fault. I am close to two marriages that ended because the men were cheating.

    What I haven’t seen, in my experience, is a Mormon marriage where the man “falls out of love” with the woman, and the woman tries desperately to keep the man. I am sure it happens, possibly even often, but I’ve never seen it. I have seen the inverse of that scenario play out four times.

  87. B.Russ,
    You don’t think cheating qualifies as falling out of love?

  88. Ahah! My foreshadowing from the saturday afternoon conference developed into something! Its NOT always the guys fault, and I really appreciate President Monson’s comments in that regard.
    Thus in liu of the previous feminist comments during Saturday afternoon, I suggest a new BCC tradename: the patronist. The male version to feminism. I appreciate the balance this thread brings to the forum, indicative of gender-based undercurrents that pervade here.

    Of course, we know its really the single man’s fault if he doesn’t get married anytime soon. (hyperbole)

    To Nobody, good luck in your situation and hope it can end as possible for you and your wife; I appreciate the viewpoint. To #84, I suspect these opinions will change slowly over time. I really doubt that our lifetime will ever get to the point where men will no longer be faced with the “You’re a man and its your fault” thing in the church. I suspect men get pretty used to it as I do, and I find it far more pleasing than having to endure doiles in Relief Society or Primary voice. Men are certainly gifted to not have a natural primary voice ability.

    What everybody needs is to just go watch a really good action flick.

  89. er… “as well/happily as possible”…, Nobody. :)

  90. “I think GAs should pretty much stay out of making generalities where so so much is individual and personal.”

    The General Authorities are given that name for a reason. It is their responsibility to deal with the generalities. I have heard Elder Oaks speak on this subject more than once. If they were to stop making general statements, there would be no general conference.

  91. 87 – I don’t know. My brain isn’t wired so that I could even conceive of cheating. Its a phenomenon I don’t understand at all. I’ve heard people claim that it doesn’t, but I have no idea. (I don’t say that to be coy; I have my sins, this just isn’t one of them.)

    I don’t think its usually followed by the woman trying desperately to hold the relationship together. It might be, but again that isn’t really the scenario I’ve seen play out.

  92. don't know mo says:

    Just my 2cents, but it seems like there are plenty of both men and women living quiet lives of desperation in their marriages. It can feel like there are no good options. This situation makes either one of them so vulnerable to an affair…which I see as a symptom, not a cause of the difficult marriage.

  93. @ 66 B. Russ. I seriously doubt that it is only one cancellation per week.

  94. Brothers (and sisters) I FINALLY had my sealing cancelled after being temple-married for 29 years, 9 children, divorce after those years of sexual abuse (rape), emotional and verbal abuse. THEN I married a nomo who has more integrity than X ever did, even tho he was in every priesthood leadership calling possible. X truly thought he did no wrong, even when he went thru a disciplinary council then yelled at me all the way home. X thought I was in the wrong for not doing what he said was right, using the temple sealing covenants (wife ‘gives’ herself to husband’ and how Eve is portrayed – silent and weak) to abuse me. It took almost TEN YEARS to have my sealing cancelled, after asking numerous bishops, sps, temple pres. etc all of whom told me it could not be done without losing my sealing to my children. When X was remarried in The temple I refused to be an unwilling polygamous wife (albeit not in this life) and I rekindled my reqest to be un-sealed. After three letters to the First Pres. asking firmly but politely to be answered I received a form letter in January, informing me my sealing to X was cancelled but NOT addressing my concern about still being sealed to my kids. I was extremely upset as I bared my soul and spilled my guts to these men, at their request when X needed a sealing clearance to be sealed to new wife, and all I got was a form letter?!?!? So…having my sealing cancelled was not sad, it was a burden lifted from me to knowing that connection to X was severed at last. As to being sealed to my kids, I believe I still am, even tho no one had the guts to tell me in those specific words. Temple cancellations are not always sad or bad!!!!

  95. Sherry,
    Last I was aware, whenever a sealing cancellation is granted the stake president(s) of the stake in which the husband/wife reside(s) receives a letter from the First Presidency apprising them of that fact and an admonition to let the children of that marriage know that the cancellation in no way adversely affects the sealing blessings that the children wish to keep.
    Your stake president should have received that letter.

  96. Stephanie says:

    MB, I so wish someone would have shared that letter with me as a kid. It would have saved me years of anguish trying to figure that out.

  97. I received a generic letter from the 1st Pres. with no personal references in it about any of the issues that were pertinent to me/my situation. An oblique reference is stated that worthy children still have the opportunity to be sealed to their parents. I suppose the opposite holds true, that worthy parents are still sealed to their children but it is not stated that way. This is what held me back for the ten after we divorced. I was told by everyone I talked to that if I asked for a cancellation I would no longer be sealed to my children. Remember, new Dh is not a member, does not want to be a member and I’m ok with that. So, I feel I was lied to in that I could not even ask for a cancellation and no one specifically addressed my sealing to my children. When my SP gave me the formal papers to sign, and his name woudl be recognized if I dropped it, he said “This goes against everything I’ve ever known about parents still being sealed to their children.” That put some angst into my heart but I knew I needed to go forward. BTW I am a worthy temple recommend holder altho I have issues with Eve’s portayal in the temple. Does not ring true with my feminist heart. Not to mention my feelings on the worthiness of X to have the ‘blessing/privilege’ of being sealed to two women (albeit for a short amount of time, until my cancellation came thru. He was p***d off when he got his letter informing him what I had done. All about control.) I have not heard from my SP after receiving my letter and he is a family friend for decades. Interesting.

  98. I have a feeling that if more women and maybe men, knew that they could cancel a sealing to a former spouse, yet retain the sealing to their children, it would become more common place. I think the reason this is not spoken of is because is that it gives women more power. In my rural Colorado ward alone, I know three women besides myself who were married to LDS men, are still sealed to them, but have now happily married nomos. One sister is still sealed to X, but has been married to new DH for almost 30 years, 4 kids, yet they are not sealed to each other because her X “won”t allow it!” How sad.

  99. Sherry–Your friend that has been married for 30 yrs, but not sealed to him because “X won’t allow it”?? That makes no sense. I can see how X could keep the kids from being sealed to new husband, but not how X could keep her from being sealed to new husband. What am I missing here?

  100. You’re missing that any time an previous spouse wants to have a new sealing (men) or cancel a sealing (women) the X is informed and asked to write a letter, not necessarily a letter of consent, but a letter asking for their feelings/history. That’s what I was asked to do by my B. when my X wanted to be sealed to his new wife. So I gave our history, in detail, hoping they would respond personally and answer my questions. Same thing happened to ‘Susie” after she marrried convert new hubby who had never been married before. Her X wrote a letter stating that he did NOT want to be unsealed to her, even tho he remarried in the temple. They had 3 kids together. Several years later ‘Susie” went thru the process again and the same thing happened. Now she has been married to new DH almost 30 years, 4 kids with him, still sealed to X with their 3 kids. She says she will prob. never try again and new DH just ignores it. They are very active wonderful people. WHY is this allowed to happen??? I told her my story hoping it will inspire her to try again. But like I used to be, maybe there is that nagging fear that your kids won’t stay sealed to you after a cancellation. All because no one will specifically say, even the 1st Pres. what happens to the kids. All I know is that in my heart, I am still sealed to them.
    This is another example of how the institution of the church does NOT empower women.

  101. Nobody,
    Sorry for making the curt comment above. I feel strongly about this issue, as I grew up around so many women in your wifes’ shoes. I hope you can work things out.

  102. God loves you and your children

  103. Sherry
    in a 1997 issue of the New Era, under the I have a Question headline, it is explained that children born in the covenant are sealed by birthright.

  104. oops, December 1975

    As to the next question, “What happens to the children in the next life when there has been a cancellation of sealing of the parents?” it is understood that in the case of a cancellation of the sealing of the woman to the man, this does not cancel the sealing of the children to the parents, since they were born in the covenant, which is a birthright blessing. They remain in the status of the sealing to their parents and can never be sealed to anyone else. The decision as to with whom they will go will be determined by the Lord in the hereafter.

  105. #72 – Not a slam on Jimmer, but definitely counsel because of Jimmer. The way I see it, if God can tell Nephi to kill someone, who’s to say He didn’t tell Jimmer to not go on a mission. Elder Anderson just doesn’t want anyone following his example simply because they think they find themselves in a similiar situation. Elder Anderson made clear the blessings of a mission and that the commandment for young men to go stands.

  106. Sunlight says:

    No one is an exception to the commandments of God. When we start to feel like our situation is different & we are the exception, then we can be sure we are receive false revelation. The Holy Spirit would tell everyone the same thing. Everyone must live by the same laws to receive Exaltation. There is no back door to the Celestial kingdom. No one gets an easier way or way out of living all the commandments that everyone else has to live.

    It is one of Satan’s favorite ploys, to get people to think they are the ‘exception to the rule’ & it works almost every time.

  107. which month of 1997 ENSIGN?

  108. #105 – This discussion reminds me of my pre-mission days at BYU. I am the same age as two LDS “child stars” who were both pretty famous at the time: Donny Osmond and Johnny Whitaker. Granted, I only heard Johnny’s side of it, but apparently Donny had been told that he didn’t need to go on a mission; he could do more for the Church by being a prominent example of the Church than by knocking on doors. Johnny was a bit put out that when he asked for the same dispensation, he was told that he should go on a mission.

    BTW, there was also an article I saw on the internet from a sports website just as Jimmermania was at its peak, with the title, “Jimmer is the Best Mormon Missionary in the World.” IIRC, it was NOT written by a member of the Church.

  109. Thomas Parkin says:

    “God loves you and your children”

    The problem is that we aren’t dealing with God, we are dealing with the church. The church is not a living organism and does not feel love. Unless members and especially leaders infuse the scene with exceptional love, the lovelessness of the institution will tend to eclipse restrained good faith of individuals.

    I can’t imagine getting a form letter in response to something so personal as asking for a sealing to be severed. Maybe this is something that could be delegated.

%d bloggers like this: