New Predictions 2019 April GC

[iWriteStuff]

Alrighty let me just play Devil's Advocate for a second.

Women in the Priesthood. If they open that can, then it means all priesthood callings could be held by women. Will that work both ways? Would men be allowed to serve as RS President and Primary President? How about YW president? If the answer is "no", then you're essentially saying that callings will be a one way street where women can serve anywhere (Bishop? Stake President? GA?) and men can only get whatever priesthood callings the women will let them have.

If you wanted to destroy all male interest in serving in the church (let alone attending), I think there'd be no better way than giving away all their priesthood callings. First they merged EQ and HP quorums, then they open up the EQP spot to any worthy woman? And yet can you imagine a 40 year old dude serving as RS President? The women would mutiny en masse.

Where is the scriptural precedent for women holding the priesthood? Any women ordained anywhere at all in the scriptures?

Lastly: Can you imagine a male porn addict having to confess to a female bishop?

I don't see that happening. There has to be balance, and this would throw things into chaos. The way to get men more involved in magnifying their callings isn't to extend them to women, but to hold them to a higher standard and show them confidence that they can be useful in building the Kingdom of God.

[inho]

Women in the Priesthood. If they open that can, then it means all priesthood callings could be held by women.

Not necessarily. As long as we don't have more information about our Mother in Heaven, we have basically no clue about what it means to be a priestess. Maybe priestesshood and priesthood are not exactly same.

Where is the scriptural precedent for women holding the priesthood? Any women ordained anywhere at all in the scriptures?

Surely you must have heard about female deacon (Phoebe) and apostle (Junia) in the New Testament. Whether the words meant the same thing then as today in the LDS church is disputable.

[iWriteStuff]

Women in the Priesthood. If they open that can, then it means all priesthood callings could be held by women.

Not necessarily. As long as we don't have more information about our Mother in Heaven, we have basically no clue about what it means to be a priestess. Maybe priestesshood and priesthood are not exactly same.

Where is the scriptural precedent for women holding the priesthood? Any women ordained anywhere at all in the scriptures?

Surely you must have heard about female deacon (Phoebe) and apostle (Junia) in the New Testament. Whether the words meant the same thing then as today in the LDS church is disputable.

As for Junia:

https://www.gotquestions.org/Junia-Junias-apostle.html

As per women with priesthood but no priesthood callings... I don't see that going over all that well either. It's like telling them they have a driver's license now but they never get to drive (except maybe when you tell them they can). See how long they're happy with that arrangement.

[inho]

As per women with priesthood but no priesthood callings... I don't see that going over all that well either. It's like telling them they have a driver's license now but they never get to drive (except maybe when you tell them they can). See how long they're happy with that arrangement.

I didn't mean to imply that. But I think that one alternative is that they have their own quorums. That there are parallel structures; kind of like RS now. However, you bring up a good point. What does it mean to have a priesthood (or priestesshood)? Often the priesthood ordinances are the first thing that come to mind, but that is not a good answer (are there ordinances specific to a high priest or to a deacon - one does not invoke the priesthood while passing the sacrament). Already now we teach that in every calling both brothers and sisters act with the delegated priesthood authority. So what would it actually mean to give priesthood to women? Now I think I get your point. Ordaining women does not make much difference unless women are incorporated to men's quorums.

[Sunain]

If anything is said regarding the WoW, I think it will be stricter.

They already made the WoW stricter in 2018 by saying that marijuana usage was against the Word of Wisdom for recreational purposes.

[BeNotDeceived]

... something about China. I've been feeling the need to pray for China for a few months. ...

The Scary Future of America! (2019-2020)
THE WORLD IN 2019: WHAT’S GOING ON?
jason a world news china

Quantum computing uses what Einstein referred to as "Spooky Action at a Distance".

Sounds like a step towards the Mark of the Beast related to making purchases, and stuff.

[ElizaRSkousen]

7yrs prosperity begins year 3.

Hydrogen trucks take to the interstates.

New emphasis on the Word of Wisdom.

First OTEC plants break ground or are put afloat.

If anything is said regarding the WoW, I think it will be stricter. But I don't think they will.

I'm hoping to hear something about China. I've been feeling the need to pray for China for a few months.

Edit: but I could see them emphasizing it, as you said, with a increased focus on using personal revelation to guide us in our use of it.

How could the WoW possibly get any stricter? Make it a sin to drink cold drinks and also we must reject grains and nuts?

I believe "hot" in hot drinks to not mean temperature, but anything "stimulating" as per Noah Webster 1820 dictionary. I don't think it'd be unreasonable for caffeine and energy drinks to be called out. I'm not expecting a recommend question, but like the 2 earring thing I could see it announced or emphasized in conference. Don't get me wrong, I love my soda and cookies as much as any Utahn, but if we were told the time has come to end our sugar addiction I wouldn't be surprised.
I just think that'd be more likely than, "hey we're going to leave it all up to you again."

I also used the 1820 dictionary to determine what hot might have meant back then

[simpleton]

What ever happens, for sure it will be a continuation of "political correctness" appealing to the masses, compromises and concessions with Babylon.....

[creator]

Effective Jan 1., 2020, the church will no longer perform temple marriages, only sealings.

This one seems inevitable.

[creator]

I do think WoW changes are likely though.

Maybe, rather than changing the WoW, they will just say that it's no longer part of the Temple Recommend questions (it wasn't originally). And they will reiterate that the WoW was not given "by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days — Given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints."

[inho]

I do think WoW changes are likely though.

Maybe, rather than changing the WoW, they will just say that it's no longer part of the Temple Recommend questions (it wasn't originally). And they will reiterate that the WoW was not given "by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days — Given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints."

Yes, that would be the way to go. Since WoW has been such a big part of LDS cultural identity for decades, any change would have to come in a subtle way.

[dewajack]

I do think WoW changes are likely though.

Maybe, rather than changing the WoW, they will just say that it's no longer part of the Temple Recommend questions (it wasn't originally). And they will reiterate that the WoW was not given "by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days — Given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints."

I sure hope you're right, after this week I could use a stiff drink about now.

[John Tavner]

I do think WoW changes are likely though.

Maybe, rather than changing the WoW, they will just say that it's no longer part of the Temple Recommend questions (it wasn't originally). And they will reiterate that the WoW was not given "by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days — Given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints."

That or no longer make it a "requirement" for baptism. That would make me rejoice exceedingly since the requirements are that we come forth with true intent, fullness of heart, with no hypocrisy and deception before the Lord, repenting of our sis and showing the Father our willingness to take upon us the name of Christ,by doing as the Son did.

[innocentoldguy]

I don't see that happening. There has to be balance, and this would throw things into chaos. The way to get men more involved in magnifying their callings isn't to extend them to women, but to hold them to a higher standard and show them confidence that they can be useful in building the Kingdom of God.

I think another way to keep men coming to church is to stop calling the same 10 people to all the leadership positions in the ward and stake. I know for myself that after 40 years of membership and never being asked to do anything, I figured the Lord didn't need me so I might as well just stay home.

[innocentoldguy]

They already made the WoW stricter in 2018 by saying that marijuana usage was against the Word of Wisdom for recreational purposes.

That seems less strict to me. Prior to that statement cannabis usage was out for any reason. At least now it is OK for non-recreational purposes, which I believe was the original intent of the Word of Wisdom anyway. Consider D&C 89:11: "Every herb in the season thereof . . . to be used with prudence and thanksgiving." To me, that means herbs, like cannabis, should be used with caution for their intended purposes and not used to get high.

[Fiannan]

I predict there will be some passive-aggressive, oh-so-subtle, attack on Donald Trump.

Think I am wrong?

[Fiannan]

My prediction is that there will be a major concession given to women. The Church has realized that they have lost the under 40 male demographic. There are lots of reasons for this but it's mostly self inflicted.

Yes, I believe you are right.

[Robin Hood]

I don't see that happening. There has to be balance, and this would throw things into chaos. The way to get men more involved in magnifying their callings isn't to extend them to women, but to hold them to a higher standard and show them confidence that they can be useful in building the Kingdom of God.

I think another way to keep men coming to church is to stop calling the same 10 people to all the leadership positions in the ward and stake. I know for myself that after 40 years of membership and never being asked to do anything, I figured the Lord didn't need me so I might as well just stay home.

There is a reason the same ten people (we call it STP in our ward) are called.
When we called people from outside the STP it was a complete disaster.

[Robin Hood]

repenting of our sis

She might be quite annoyed but I'm willing to give it a go.

[kirtland r.m.]

in before Flagg

Hi Original_Intent, ha ha, very good. Spot on.

[mirkwood]

A typical full sized ward has about 25 families you can always count on. The remainder are hit and miss. That is why you so often see STP in play. That isn't the fault of the STP, it's the fault of the rest for being lukewarm.

[iWriteStuff]

A typical full sized ward has about 25 families you can always count on. The remainder are hit and miss. That is why you so often see STP in play. That isn't the fault of the STP, it's the fault of the rest for being lukewarm.

Boy ain't that the truth..... When you start looking around to find people to fill what you would consider a fun and easy calling, you'll be surprised how few are both able and (especially) willing. Kinda scares me sometimes.

[JK4Woods]

I don't see that happening. There has to be balance, and this would throw things into chaos. The way to get men more involved in magnifying their callings isn't to extend them to women, but to hold them to a higher standard and show them confidence that they can be useful in building the Kingdom of God.

I think another way to keep men coming to church is to stop calling the same 10 people to all the leadership positions in the ward and stake. I know for myself that after 40 years of membership and never being asked to do anything, I figured the Lord didn't need me so I might as well just stay home.

There is a reason the same ten people (we call it STP in our ward) are called.
When we called people from outside the STP it was a complete disaster.

“Complete Disaster” ...??
Did the meeting start on time?
Was the Sacrament blessed and passed?
Were the tithes and offering collected?

Did a few people give talks in sacrament meeting?

We’re the sick visited? The downtrodden raised?

I only ask because the real reason STP are used is to keep things on track according to the traditional local powers that be. The tendency is to keep everything the same and regulate to what is familiar and traditionally known.

We as a church also tend to reap what we sow.
Look at BYU... they decided to become the “Harvard of the West” and ratcheted up admittance requirements that excluded a lot of diversity. Not racial diversity, but student diversity. It got to the point that over-achievers were the norm, and many students admitted were less well rounded than previously.
BYU has recognized that they went too far, and are now easing the high standards to allow regular people attend that school.

If the STP don’t relinquish power, and groom other faithful to take their place in leadership, then they have failed by the highest order.

The object is not to manage and run the church program. The object is to mentor and cultivate future leaders.

It’s a hard lesson. We had a long serving bishop who wouldn’t call any woman to a leadership position who hadn’t served a mission. Instantly it was the STP in the auxiliary callings, for years...!!

Anyway, I don’t mind if church services look and feel different than before. As long as the leaders seek inspiration and give their best, I’m ok with it.

[LadyT]

I don't see that happening. There has to be balance, and this would throw things into chaos. The way to get men more involved in magnifying their callings isn't to extend them to women, but to hold them to a higher standard and show them confidence that they can be useful in building the Kingdom of God.

I think another way to keep men coming to church is to stop calling the same 10 people to all the leadership positions in the ward and stake. I know for myself that after 40 years of membership and never being asked to do anything, I figured the Lord didn't need me so I might as well just stay home.

There is a reason the same ten people (we call it STP in our ward) are called.
When we called people from outside the STP it was a complete disaster.

“Complete Disaster” ...??
Did the meeting start on time?
Was the Sacrament blessed and passed?
Were the tithes and offering collected?

Did a few people give talks in sacrament meeting?

We’re the sick visited? The downtrodden raised?

I only ask because the real reason STP are used is to keep things on track according to the traditional local powers that be. The tendency is to keep everything the same and regulate to what is familiar and traditionally known.

We as a church also tend to reap what we sow.
Look at BYU... they decided to become the “Harvard of the West” and ratcheted up admittance requirements that excluded a lot of diversity. Not racial diversity, but student diversity. It got to the point that over-achievers were the norm, and many students admitted were less well rounded than previously.
BYU has recognized that they went too far, and are now easing the high standards to allow regular people attend that school.

If the STP don’t relinquish power, and groom other faithful to take their place in leadership, then they have failed by the highest order.

The object is not to manage and run the church program. The object is to mentor and cultivate future leaders.

It’s a hard lesson. We had a long serving bishop who wouldn’t call any woman to a leadership position who hadn’t served a mission. Instantly it was the STP in the auxiliary callings, for years...!!

Anyway, I don’t mind if church services look and feel different than before. As long as the leaders seek inspiration and give their best, I’m ok with it.

In my home ward, it ended up with people just not showing up. My dad was in primary. He would end up with 4 classes in his class. So many, including the presidency wouldn't show up.
It happened in yw's . We showed up for activities and there would be no leaders and nothing planned. It was a nightmare. The bishop released a lot of people and call the old faithful ones. Things ran. They didn't before. So many youth were fell away during this time. It's hard to keep coming and doing stuff when you have leaders that don't care.

I wish people wouldn't accept callings that they have no plans or doing or only doing it to the bare basics. Our youth deserve the very best we can give.

[innocentoldguy]

"There is a reason the same ten people (we call it STP in our ward) are called.
When we called people from outside the STP it was a complete disaster."

That has not been my experience. I was an assistant stake clerk for a year or so and in my opinion cronyism dictated leadership positions more than anything else. For example, I was in one meeting where the stake presidency was trying to call a new branch president for one of the branches in our stake. Before the stake presidency started spouting off names, I correctly predicted not only the six names they would throw out (because those were the names they ALWAYS threw out), but also which presidency member would say which names. Unfortunately, for them, they had just called all their friends to be bishops, high counsel members, or bishopric counselors. Instead of picking one of the other 300+ active, tithing-paying men in the stake to fill the responsibility, the stake president said we couldn't handle it and got permission to have another stake extend the calling to one of its members. That particular stake president felt that if you weren't a high priest before 30 there was something wrong with you and he simply wouldn't call you to any leadership positions. That trickled down into the wards through bishopric training as well. There were plenty of active people who were there every week, there at all the church cleanings and other service activities, who were never given a chance to do anything. I ended up working at the Jordan River temple as an ordinance worker for three years, just to have something to do, before the inequity in my ward and stake irritated me to the point that I left the church. We moved and I came back about five years later, but to be honest, not much has changed.

Also, in spite of much protesting to the contrary, there is indeed a notion in the church that going from bishop to primary teacher is a demotion, so typically released bishops are pushed into the high council or quorum leadership positions, leaving little room for anybody else. I've also seen friends of leaders carefully groomed to be the next bishop, etc. In my last stake, they had the bishop callings for my ward pre-decided three bishops out. Even though those callings spanned two stake presidents, the plan played out exactly as I heard it when I was the assistant clerk. That simply isn't fair to all the other members of the ward, nor is it inspired. So, again, if you want to keep men from going inactive, stop calling the same ten people all the time and give others a chance to learn and grow. If you can groom a friend to be the bishop, you should be able to groom anybody for any leadership calling.

---------

"A typical full sized ward has about 25 families you can always count on. The remainder are hit and miss. That is why you so often see STP in play. That isn't the fault of the STP, it's the fault of the rest for being lukewarm."

This reminds me of the story about the rancher who had his sons breaking his horses. A neighbor came by and told the rancher he could hire a guy that could break the horses a lot faster and do a better job. The rancher replied, "I could, but I'm not raising horses. I'm raising sons."

I think far too often wards and stakes lose sight of their purpose. It isn't about meetings being perfect, interesting speeches, outgoing personalities, people's age, past callings, or where they choose to sit in the chapel during a meeting. It is about the individuals and their personal growth in the gospel. If you ignore that fact, and stymie their growth because you're focusing too much on the horses, so to speak, people will stop participating. At least I did.