Desired Changes

[harakim]

I know the Church makes the changes, but I want to know what changes you hope the church is inspired to make or which you feel good about. Certainly some people want to see polygamy come back. Some people would like the Word of Wisdom Change.
Also, are there any changes you are fearful of.

Here are mine. (Specifically, I put the ones that are fine lines)

HOPE:
I would like to see them allow the bishop to run the ward. (Have a church led by the spirit, not by correlated materials)
Request local wards to make more of an effort to join temporally (Law of Consecration/Zion)
Official Statement Gay married people are welcome at Church (not saying it's not a sin, just saying m/l all sinners are welcome)
Women officially given priesthoodess duties

FEAR:
We all have to consecrate everything to Church Corp
We all have to move to Missouri. (I really don't like Missouri.)
Polygamy (If it happens, I might be fine with it)
Homosexuality is not a sin or gay sealings (Not too worried, but you never know)
Signs for the unbelievers
Women get same priesthood as men

[mtm411]

I have thought about this a lot! I love a lot of the changes so far. I especially like 2 hour church, the temple wording changes, and missionary communicating more freely changes.

I am not worried about polygamy coming back at all. It just isn't going to happen. The church learned it's lesson. There's way too much history of abuse surrounding it.

I am worried about the church going increasingly mainstream. Some of these things I would welcome, but we are losing our status as a people, a tribe.

I think young marriage and a lot of children, as well as a parent being home to care for the children is really good for the family. Focusing on children with our youth and primary programs has paid dividends for decades as far as teaching and retaining children as future members of the church. I see that focus changing to what is best for adults and their feelings, and their desires for pleasure and wealth. That worries me. Hardly anyone under 45 in my ward has more than 2 or 3 kids and has both parents working. It seems they are working to provide a certain lifestyle as they go on a lot of trips abroad and have their kids in all the most expensive sports programs.

I think a simple, child and home centered life is really best for all of us. Men and women. When we turn children into a liability against our aspirations I think that's a real problem. Men are equally guilty of this. They want wives to be available to them and not to be focused on babies, they want to work ambitious jobs with a lot of travel and time away from home. Or to not have to work hard enough to support a large number of children. So many in our ward won't even work in primary or nursery as it's seen as beneath them.

I don't know what the church would do about this. If they emphasize the blessings of having a large family, it hurts the feelings of singles and those that can't. Single members are important, but it really is children that will keep our church alive and relevant to future generations.

[kittycat51]

I would love to see the change of "getting out of the marriage business". I've mentioned it before on the forum but I'll mention it again. I think there would be several benefits. I think that many get married in the temple to just check it off their list; to be able to say "I married in the temple". BUT then they take off their garments and never go back. What good does that do at all? I also believe that going after a marriage to be sealed it will be WAY less of a production; you won't have the whole bridal party showing up in matching dresses and tuxes. There won't be cheering on the temple grounds afterwards when the "Mr. & Mrs." step out. (That is SO DISTRACTING to patrons) Just this past weekend I went to my nieces wedding at the Salt Lake temple. The waiting room is always a zoo. People don't know how to be reverent there. There was a rather large group, bigger than I've ever seen. Many of the girls were in matching gold, long gowns. Obviously the bridesmaids dresses. It was rather obnoxious and certainly a distraction. I think a sealing would be a much more sacred process. There would be no other things to think about that day...the wedding lunch...pictures...the reception...the wedding night. All that would be past. Just focus on the sacredness of the sealing ordinance.

It doesn't matter in real life whether you marry in the temple on the original wedding day; just that you were sealed period.

*Edit: I would bet the size of those in attendance to the sealing would also go down, because the "thrill" of the marriage is already past. Not all of the gazillion friends, just close family members. This alone would make it more intimate and reverent.

[thestock]

Changes to make:

1. Eliminate the word of wisdom
2. Elders Quorum is not a moving company
3. No more members cleaning the church building
4. Since the gays have forever changed marriage laws in this land....I would be TOTALLY FINE if sealed LDS couples consentually desire to enter into a polygamous marriage and are able to do it legally via the laws of our land. Those couples should be allowed to worship and enjoy all the same blessings that are currently available in the church.
5. Lets start giving faithful members that dont necessarily "check all the boxes" some leadership positions....i.e., you don't need to always be a successful and rich, clean cut family man to be the bishop. I'd be stoked to have the guy with the scraggly beard who works at Subway as the bishop....so long as he's worthy and committed to it.

[brianj]

HOPE:
I would like to see them allow the bishop to run the ward. (Have a church led by the spirit, not by correlated materials)
Request local wards to make more of an effort to join temporally (Law of Consecration/Zion)
Official Statement Gay married people are welcome at Church (not saying it's not a sin, just saying m/l all sinners are welcome)
Women officially given priesthoodess duties

FEAR:
We all have to consecrate everything to Church Corp
We all have to move to Missouri. (I really don't like Missouri.)
Polygamy (If it happens, I might be fine with it)
Homosexuality is not a sin or gay sealings (Not too worried, but you never know)
Signs for the unbelievers
Women get same priesthood as men

The bishop already runs the ward. The church rules don't completely tie his hands so he has a lot that he can do.
I would just love to see more ward unity. I don't believe there's any chance most active members could handle approaching the law of consecration.
I thought that we have already had plenty of guidance saying that we should make all welcome. We need stronger teaching on this subject, not another policy statement.
Women already exercise priesthood authority, just without being ordained. In temples women perform priesthood ordinances. And every leader in the church is exercising priesthood authority.

None of your fears are realistic so don't worry.

[brianj]

I would love to see the change of "getting out of the marriage business". I've mentioned it before on the forum but I'll mention it again. I think there would be several benefits. I think that many get married in the temple to just check it off their list; to be able to say "I married in the temple". BUT then they take off their garments and never go back. What good does that do at all? I also believe that going after a marriage to be sealed it will be WAY less of a production; you won't have the whole bridal party showing up in matching dresses and tuxes. There won't be cheering on the temple grounds afterwards when the "Mr. & Mrs." step out. (That is SO DISTRACTING to patrons) Just this past weekend I went to my nieces wedding at the Salt Lake temple. The waiting room is always a zoo. People don't know how to be reverent there. There was a rather large group, bigger than I've ever seen. Many of the girls were in matching gold, long gowns. Obviously the bridesmaids dresses. It was rather obnoxious and certainly a distraction. I think a sealing would be a much more sacred process. There would be no other things to think about that day...the wedding lunch...pictures...the reception...the wedding night. All that would be past. Just focus on the sacredness of the sealing ordinance.

It doesn't matter in real life whether you marry in the temple on the original wedding day; just that you were sealed period.

*Edit: I would bet the size of those in attendance to the sealing would also go down, because the "thrill" of the marriage is already past. Not all of the gazillion friends, just close family members. This alone would make it more intimate and reverent.

I would love to see this too. It really disturbs me when I have to fight my way through a big crowd who think their desire to stand around waiting for a newlywed couple trumps the desire of patrons to walk between the parking lot and temple doors. And it ruins the temple worship experience for me when I hear a very loud cheer from outside. Additionally, if the church stops performing temple marriages then families of converts will not be excluded from the marriage ceremony.

[Primary Outcast]

I would love to see the change of "getting out of the marriage business". I've mentioned it before on the forum but I'll mention it again. I think there would be several benefits. I think that many get married in the temple to just check it off their list; to be able to say "I married in the temple". BUT then they take off their garments and never go back. What good does that do at all? I also believe that going after a marriage to be sealed it will be WAY less of a production; you won't have the whole bridal party showing up in matching dresses and tuxes. There won't be cheering on the temple grounds afterwards when the "Mr. & Mrs." step out. (That is SO DISTRACTING to patrons) Just this past weekend I went to my nieces wedding at the Salt Lake temple. The waiting room is always a zoo. People don't know how to be reverent there. There was a rather large group, bigger than I've ever seen. Many of the girls were in matching gold, long gowns. Obviously the bridesmaids dresses. It was rather obnoxious and certainly a distraction. I think a sealing would be a much more sacred process. There would be no other things to think about that day...the wedding lunch...pictures...the reception...the wedding night. All that would be past. Just focus on the sacredness of the sealing ordinance.

It doesn't matter in real life whether you marry in the temple on the original wedding day; just that you were sealed period.

*Edit: I would bet the size of those in attendance to the sealing would also go down, because the "thrill" of the marriage is already past. Not all of the gazillion friends, just close family members. This alone would make it more intimate and reverent.

I would love to see this too. It really disturbs me when I have to fight my way through a big crowd who think their desire to stand around waiting for a newlywed couple trumps the desire of patrons to walk between the parking lot and temple doors. And it ruins the temple worship experience for me when I hear a very loud cheer from outside. Additionally, if the church stops performing temple marriages then families of converts will not be excluded from the marriage ceremony.

The big ceremonies also open the temple up to desecration. There are tons of people who never go except for a wedding or live ordinance and I'm sure some of them are not worthy to be there, but come because of social pressure.

[Davka]

I'll echo the sentiments here about the temple wedding changes. There are so many good reasons to make the changes and no reason not to that I can think of. Plus it's already that way in many parts of the world.

When I think about it, it is kind of weird that I got married in my temple dress, then went and changed into my wedding dress in the temple dressing room for the big show outside the temple...a lot of mixing of the world and the sacred. Plus the whole ring ceremony in the temple is a little strange as well.

[kittycat51]

I would love to see the change of "getting out of the marriage business". I've mentioned it before on the forum but I'll mention it again. I think there would be several benefits. I think that many get married in the temple to just check it off their list; to be able to say "I married in the temple". BUT then they take off their garments and never go back. What good does that do at all? I also believe that going after a marriage to be sealed it will be WAY less of a production; you won't have the whole bridal party showing up in matching dresses and tuxes. There won't be cheering on the temple grounds afterwards when the "Mr. & Mrs." step out. (That is SO DISTRACTING to patrons) Just this past weekend I went to my nieces wedding at the Salt Lake temple. The waiting room is always a zoo. People don't know how to be reverent there. There was a rather large group, bigger than I've ever seen. Many of the girls were in matching gold, long gowns. Obviously the bridesmaids dresses. It was rather obnoxious and certainly a distraction. I think a sealing would be a much more sacred process. There would be no other things to think about that day...the wedding lunch...pictures...the reception...the wedding night. All that would be past. Just focus on the sacredness of the sealing ordinance.

It doesn't matter in real life whether you marry in the temple on the original wedding day; just that you were sealed period.

*Edit: I would bet the size of those in attendance to the sealing would also go down, because the "thrill" of the marriage is already past. Not all of the gazillion friends, just close family members. This alone would make it more intimate and reverent.

I would love to see this too. It really disturbs me when I have to fight my way through a big crowd who think their desire to stand around waiting for a newlywed couple trumps the desire of patrons to walk between the parking lot and temple doors. And it ruins the temple worship experience for me when I hear a very loud cheer from outside. Additionally, if the church stops performing temple marriages then families of converts will not be excluded from the marriage ceremony.

The big ceremonies also open the temple up to desecration. There are tons of people who never go except for a wedding or live ordinance and I'm sure some of them are not worthy to be there, but come because of social pressure.

I echo this sediment. My daughter in law's mother had been on her way "out" of the Church for sometime. Yet she was able to get a recommend to taker her daughter through the temple and to witness the marriage. Afterwards she took off her garments, and walked out of the Church. Not been back since. (Even her own daughter knew that she should not have been there.)

[harakim]

I have thought about this a lot! I love a lot of the changes so far. I especially like 2 hour church, the temple wording changes, and missionary communicating more freely changes.

I am not worried about polygamy coming back at all. It just isn't going to happen. The church learned it's lesson. There's way too much history of abuse surrounding it.

I am worried about the church going increasingly mainstream. Some of these things I would welcome, but we are losing our status as a people, a tribe.

I think young marriage and a lot of children, as well as a parent being home to care for the children is really good for the family. Focusing on children with our youth and primary programs has paid dividends for decades as far as teaching and retaining children as future members of the church. I see that focus changing to what is best for adults and their feelings, and their desires for pleasure and wealth. That worries me. Hardly anyone under 45 in my ward has more than 2 or 3 kids and has both parents working. It seems they are working to provide a certain lifestyle as they go on a lot of trips abroad and have their kids in all the most expensive sports programs.

I think a simple, child and home centered life is really best for all of us. Men and women. When we turn children into a liability against our aspirations I think that's a real problem. Men are equally guilty of this. They want wives to be available to them and not to be focused on babies, they want to work ambitious jobs with a lot of travel and time away from home. Or to not have to work hard enough to support a large number of children. So many in our ward won't even work in primary or nursery as it's seen as beneath them.

I don't know what the church would do about this. If they emphasize the blessings of having a large family, it hurts the feelings of singles and those that can't. Single members are important, but it really is children that will keep our church alive and relevant to future generations.

I agree with this. I also don't know what the church would do. I guess they just need to challenge the assumptions that people have about what is right and wrong. There isn't a lot else they can do besides ask people to learn what Jesus taught, which they already do.


It sounds like most people really want to separate marriage and sealings. I have never been to a temple marriage and was married outside the temple and sealed later, so perhaps that is why I don't have the strong opinion myself.

[Zathura]

I know the Church makes the changes, but I want to know what changes you hope the church is inspired to make or which you feel good about. Certainly some people want to see polygamy come back. Some people would like the Word of Wisdom Change.
Also, are there any changes you are fearful of.

Here are mine. (Specifically, I put the ones that are fine lines)

HOPE:
I would like to see them allow the bishop to run the ward. (Have a church led by the spirit, not by correlated materials)
Request local wards to make more of an effort to join temporally (Law of Consecration/Zion)
Official Statement Gay married people are welcome at Church (not saying it's not a sin, just saying m/l all sinners are welcome)
Women officially given priesthoodess duties

FEAR:
We all have to consecrate everything to Church Corp
We all have to move to Missouri. (I really don't like Missouri.)
Polygamy (If it happens, I might be fine with it)
Homosexuality is not a sin or gay sealings (Not too worried, but you never know)
Signs for the unbelievers
Women get same priesthood as men

I would like to see the Doctrine of Christ properly taught. I would like to see more love and less condemnation towards members who don't abide by every rule and law in the Church, especially youth.
I would like to see an increased emphasis on helping the church members understand repentance correctly.
I would like to see a decreased emphasis on works and checking off lists.(I think President Nelson has started doing this a bit)

I would have liked to see more transparency in regards to Church History, however I think the Church leaders chose the course they wanted to take and they are sticking with it. I wish they didn't throw Joseph under the bus. (Don't want to derail this thread into polygamy)

[Jamescm]

DESIRED CHANGES:
- Set up the female leadership of the Church to have the same structure, functions, and roles of the male leadership of the Church, because my wife and I always fulfill exactly the same responsibilities, and in exactly the same way, because that is socially popular with people who unconditionally hate the Church and seek to rob our freedoms.
- Tell me I'm allowed to eat, drink, breathe, and inject whatever I want, whenever I want. My thoughts about the deliciousness of green tea flavored things are more important to me than honing my obediance or avoiding dangers that the world either contests or isn't aware of.
- A memorandom stating that the Constitution isn't so important after all, and that it is okay to live off of other people as long as the law says it's okay.
- Tell me I don't have to remind myself of my temple covenants every time I get dressed.
- Make Church services optional, because my relationship with my Savior is entirely personal and can't benefit at all from companionship with others.
- If I drop by Sunday School once in a while, I want everyone to be really sensitive and make sure never to suggest that anything anyoen may possibly do is not ideal, because not offending people is more important than identifying and rejecting sin in our lives. We shouldn't judge anything anyone does to help us determine not to do it ourselves.
- Stop asking me to sacrifice ideas I like, or embrace ideas I don't necessarily agree with.
- Permit me to mostly follow the Church, but to deviate in this or that point when it suites me because it is more immediately satisfying, more convenient, or fits in with popular opinions.
- Aknowledge that <allpastprophetsandteachingsidon'tlike> were wrong after all.
- Basically, allow me to somehow develop big, strong spiritual muscles without having to lift, push, or pull heavy spiritual weight.

[ElizaRSkousen]

DESIRED CHANGES:
- Set up the female leadership of the Church to have the same structure, functions, and roles of the male leadership of the Church, because my wife and I always fulfill exactly the same responsibilities, and in exactly the same way, because that is socially popular with people who unconditionally hate the Church and seek to rob our freedoms.
- Tell me I'm allowed to eat, drink, breathe, and inject whatever I want, whenever I want. My thoughts about the deliciousness of green tea flavored things are more important to me than honing my obediance or avoiding dangers that the world either contests or isn't aware of.
- A memorandom stating that the Constitution isn't so important after all, and that it is okay to live off of other people as long as the law says it's okay.
- Tell me I don't have to remind myself of my temple covenants every time I get dressed.
- Make Church services optional, because my relationship with my Savior is entirely personal and can't benefit at all from companionship with others.
- If I drop by Sunday School once in a while, I want everyone to be really sensitive and make sure never to suggest that anything anyoen may possibly do is not ideal, because not offending people is more important than identifying and rejecting sin in our lives. We shouldn't judge anything anyone does to help us determine not to do it ourselves.
- Stop asking me to sacrifice ideas I like, or embrace ideas I don't necessarily agree with.
- Permit me to mostly follow the Church, but to deviate in this or that point when it suites me because it is more immediately satisfying, more convenient, or fits in with popular opinions.
- Aknowledge that <allpastprophetsandteachingsidon'tlike> were wrong after all.
- Basically, allow me to somehow develop big, strong spiritual muscles without having to lift, push, or pull heavy spiritual weight.

There’s an easy way for you to get all those things... why be a Mormon if you hate the way Mormonism is

[EmmaLee]

DESIRED CHANGES:
- Set up the female leadership of the Church to have the same structure, functions, and roles of the male leadership of the Church, because my wife and I always fulfill exactly the same responsibilities, and in exactly the same way, because that is socially popular with people who unconditionally hate the Church and seek to rob our freedoms.
- Tell me I'm allowed to eat, drink, breathe, and inject whatever I want, whenever I want. My thoughts about the deliciousness of green tea flavored things are more important to me than honing my obediance or avoiding dangers that the world either contests or isn't aware of.
- A memorandom stating that the Constitution isn't so important after all, and that it is okay to live off of other people as long as the law says it's okay.
- Tell me I don't have to remind myself of my temple covenants every time I get dressed.
- Make Church services optional, because my relationship with my Savior is entirely personal and can't benefit at all from companionship with others.
- If I drop by Sunday School once in a while, I want everyone to be really sensitive and make sure never to suggest that anything anyoen may possibly do is not ideal, because not offending people is more important than identifying and rejecting sin in our lives. We shouldn't judge anything anyone does to help us determine not to do it ourselves.
- Stop asking me to sacrifice ideas I like, or embrace ideas I don't necessarily agree with.
- Permit me to mostly follow the Church, but to deviate in this or that point when it suites me because it is more immediately satisfying, more convenient, or fits in with popular opinions.
- Aknowledge that <allpastprophetsandteachingsidon'tlike> were wrong after all.
- Basically, allow me to somehow develop big, strong spiritual muscles without having to lift, push, or pull heavy spiritual weight.

There’s an easy way for you to get all those things... why be a Mormon if you hate the way Mormonism is

Pretty sure he was being facetious.

[Tbone]

I just want fewer leadership meetings, especially on Sunday.

[ElizaRSkousen]

DESIRED CHANGES:
- Set up the female leadership of the Church to have the same structure, functions, and roles of the male leadership of the Church, because my wife and I always fulfill exactly the same responsibilities, and in exactly the same way, because that is socially popular with people who unconditionally hate the Church and seek to rob our freedoms.
- Tell me I'm allowed to eat, drink, breathe, and inject whatever I want, whenever I want. My thoughts about the deliciousness of green tea flavored things are more important to me than honing my obediance or avoiding dangers that the world either contests or isn't aware of.
- A memorandom stating that the Constitution isn't so important after all, and that it is okay to live off of other people as long as the law says it's okay.
- Tell me I don't have to remind myself of my temple covenants every time I get dressed.
- Make Church services optional, because my relationship with my Savior is entirely personal and can't benefit at all from companionship with others.
- If I drop by Sunday School once in a while, I want everyone to be really sensitive and make sure never to suggest that anything anyoen may possibly do is not ideal, because not offending people is more important than identifying and rejecting sin in our lives. We shouldn't judge anything anyone does to help us determine not to do it ourselves.
- Stop asking me to sacrifice ideas I like, or embrace ideas I don't necessarily agree with.
- Permit me to mostly follow the Church, but to deviate in this or that point when it suites me because it is more immediately satisfying, more convenient, or fits in with popular opinions.
- Aknowledge that <allpastprophetsandteachingsidon'tlike> were wrong after all.
- Basically, allow me to somehow develop big, strong spiritual muscles without having to lift, push, or pull heavy spiritual weight.

There’s an easy way for you to get all those things... why be a Mormon if you hate the way Mormonism is

Pretty sure he was being facetious.

I can never tell!

[LadyT]

I just want fewer leadership meetings, especially on Sunday.

I will agree with this. I dislike having to be alone with the kids on Sunday mornings. I want my husband home on sunday more. I loved growing up having my dad around on sunday morning. He made us all pancakes and we got to sit around the table and talk. I wish my kids could have some of that.

[Alaris]

I would love to see the change of "getting out of the marriage business". I've mentioned it before on the forum but I'll mention it again. I think there would be several benefits. I think that many get married in the temple to just check it off their list; to be able to say "I married in the temple". BUT then they take off their garments and never go back. What good does that do at all? I also believe that going after a marriage to be sealed it will be WAY less of a production; you won't have the whole bridal party showing up in matching dresses and tuxes. There won't be cheering on the temple grounds afterwards when the "Mr. & Mrs." step out. (That is SO DISTRACTING to patrons) Just this past weekend I went to my nieces wedding at the Salt Lake temple. The waiting room is always a zoo. People don't know how to be reverent there. There was a rather large group, bigger than I've ever seen. Many of the girls were in matching gold, long gowns. Obviously the bridesmaids dresses. It was rather obnoxious and certainly a distraction. I think a sealing would be a much more sacred process. There would be no other things to think about that day...the wedding lunch...pictures...the reception...the wedding night. All that would be past. Just focus on the sacredness of the sealing ordinance.

It doesn't matter in real life whether you marry in the temple on the original wedding day; just that you were sealed period.

*Edit: I would bet the size of those in attendance to the sealing would also go down, because the "thrill" of the marriage is already past. Not all of the gazillion friends, just close family members. This alone would make it more intimate and reverent.

Great post! A few months back I went to the Gilbert temple for an endowment session. There was a young man getting married who was obsessed about how his hair looked under his cap. He kept asking his guide how he looked - and I get it as he's getting married - but *BBBAAARRRFFF*! He was SO vain about it!

I watched the excellent video about the Italy temple that Michelle posted - at one point they show the area where brides get ready and it totally seemed out of place with mirrors everywhere. The mirrors of course only face in one direction which is interesting to consider in the context of the sealing room. Still, that also bothered me that we bring the vanity of the world inside our temple. Is separating out a wedding and a sealing the answer? Maybe so ... but I agree something must be done here. We certainly won't have a ZION where this vanity persists.

[Alaris]

I just want fewer leadership meetings, especially on Sunday.

I will agree with this. I dislike having to be alone with the kids on Sunday mornings. I want my husband home on sunday more. I loved growing up having my dad around on sunday morning. He made us all pancakes and we got to sit around the table and talk. I wish my kids could have some of that.

I hate meetings - I always feel like we're sitting around talking about getting things done rather than just getting things done. I'm not saying do away with meetings, but the spirit of the sabbath is a day of rest. Waking up early is absolutely against this spirit. Full disclosure - I am a night owl and not an early bird at all.

I have jokingly said over the years that when I become prophet, this will be the first order of business. No early meetings on Sunday. That includes sacrament meeting. Rest! Then go to church. Early birds would resist, but night owls are people too!

[Davka]

I just want fewer leadership meetings, especially on Sunday.

I will agree with this. I dislike having to be alone with the kids on Sunday mornings. I want my husband home on sunday more. I loved growing up having my dad around on sunday morning. He made us all pancakes and we got to sit around the table and talk. I wish my kids could have some of that.

I hate meetings - I always feel like we're sitting around talking about getting things done rather than just getting things done. I'm not saying do away with meetings, but the spirit of the sabbath is a day of rest. Waking up early is absolutely against this spirit. Full disclosure - I am a night owl and not an early bird at all.

I have jokingly said over the years that when I become prophet, this will be the first order of business. No early meetings on Sunday. That includes sacrament meeting. Rest! Then go to church. Early birds would resist, but night owls are people too!

+1

Why is it considered lazy to sleep in but not to go to bed early?!

[LadyT]

I just want fewer leadership meetings, especially on Sunday.

I will agree with this. I dislike having to be alone with the kids on Sunday mornings. I want my husband home on sunday more. I loved growing up having my dad around on sunday morning. He made us all pancakes and we got to sit around the table and talk. I wish my kids could have some of that.

I hate meetings - I always feel like we're sitting around talking about getting things done rather than just getting things done. I'm not saying do away with meetings, but the spirit of the sabbath is a day of rest. Waking up early is absolutely against this spirit. Full disclosure - I am a night owl and not an early bird at all.

I have jokingly said over the years that when I become prophet, this will be the first order of business. No early meetings on Sunday. That includes sacrament meeting. Rest! Then go to church. Early birds would resist, but night owls are people too!

I am all for it. Night owl here as well.

[Phantom]

None of this stuff is going to happen. Church will actually dissolve as an organized weekly meeting and everything will happen in the home. "Callings" will actually take place within the home. Each home's priesthood leader will meet with ward leadership in the home. Everything will be home-based. Everything.

[LucianAMD]

I would like to see the Church repent of their apostate ways and return to the doctrines of Christ.

[4Joshua8]

Here's my list of changes I think are coming, whether in April or in the next couple years:

1. More inspired changes to bishop workload, including more responsibility for other key holders and for parents and families, moving toward individual and family accountability as much as possible. Smaller wards.

2. Significant temple building and temple work change, similar or larger in scope to that of President Hinckley's.

3. Canonization of The Family: A Proclamation to the World (and maybe also The Living Christ), putting to rest forever (I hope) the claim that the church is going to embrace and codify SSM.

4. A China change/announcement (sometime before President Nelson has passed away).

5. An announcement pertaining to at least one middle-eastern, Muslim-majority country.

6. More responsibilities/opportunities for females.

7. More opportunities for proselyting missions for people not in the young-adult age group as well as for families.

8. A massive final push to finish the mission to let everyone hear the message of the restoration.

9. Restoration to the original intent of various teachings, including those found in Section 89, which we call "The Word of Wisdom." Note that if you think about it, there's not just one word of wisdom. It's just part of God's vast library of wisdom. The section begins, "A word of wisdom," not, "THE word of wisdom," meaning, "Hey, guys, this is a word to the wise." I love rhyming unintentionally. Some call our current policy a "higher law" to the "lower law" of Section 89. I think that's backward. The higher law is Section 89 as written. What we have now is more like those Law of Moses features that were temporary in nature, and we only have them because we were so contentious about what God gave to us originally. IMO, Section 89 is beautiful and correct as written, and at the same time the prophets were inspired to create the policy we have today. We should obey the policy/commandment as defined today, to be sure, but I believe the time is coming (I hope soon) when we will again have as our primary motive of following the Lord's wisdom not be because we HAVE to in order to feel part of the church, but because we want the blessings the Lord said are ours if we do; if we keep it we get those blessings, and if we don't we are still members of fellowship who are just lacking certain blessings we might otherwise have. The section carries with it its own reward and lack of reward. I understand the dangers of alcohol and tobacco as well as anyone, and I lived in Portland, Oregon, so I know how ridiculous and expensive Coffee addiction can be (I actually don't believe "hot" means "coffee and tea," but just means "hot in temperature," which is how people typically drink coffee and tea, but that's another topic for another time). I'm not looking for a free-for-all on these substances. I still want to not use them and hope others will choose the same. But I feel we are missing out on a ton of blessings and opportunities because of how we approach Section 89. I hope the church is ready for that kind of freedom.

Generally speaking, I think we can expect massive organizational tweaks with the following principles in mind: individual accountability to God, family-first discipleship, parents lead the home, women more involved in the church, bishops better able to focus on youth, keeping youth safe from predators, restoring revelations to their original intent, more temples and more effective/efficient use of temples, and finishing the work of preaching the gospel.

[harakim]

Here's my list of changes I think are coming, whether in April or in the next couple years:

1. More inspired changes to bishop workload, including more responsibility for other key holders and for parents and families, moving toward individual and family accountability as much as possible. Smaller wards.

I think this is coming.

2. Significant temple building and temple work change, similar or larger in scope to that of President Hinckley's.

This is coming

3. Canonization of The Family: A Proclamation to the World (and maybe also The Living Christ), putting to rest forever (I hope) the claim that the church is going to embrace and codify SSM.

This would be awesome

4. A China change/announcement (sometime before President Nelson has passed away).

This won't happen in reality, so if it happens, you can know the Church is in bed with Babylon

5. An announcement pertaining to at least one middle-eastern, Muslim-majority country.

I think this is a huge goal of theirs and is actually likely (perhaps not the middle-eastern part)

6. More responsibilities/opportunities for females.

Will happen

7. More opportunities for proselyting missions for people not in the young-adult age group as well as for families.

This would be cool too

8. A massive final push to finish the mission to let everyone hear the message of the restoration.

I think this would actually be a great way to stop the bleeding of members

9. Restoration to the original intent of various teachings, including those found in Section 89...
This is one I'm wondering about

What we have now is more like those Law of Moses features that were temporary in nature, and we only have them because we were so contentious about what God gave to us originally.
Exceptionally well-worded