Would the real Boyd Packer please stand up?

[_LDSToronto]

After yesterday's confusion, the truth is revealed:

Boyd's super awesome leadership talk from February 11, 2012

In it, he plays some old classics like Women Are Tickets To Heaven:

"We are sometimes charged with being unkind to the sisters in that they do not hold the priesthood and therefore do not hold the offices that the brethren do. But it is well understood that whether or not we are exalted depends upon the sister who is at our side—the wife, the mother of our children—and no holder of the priesthood would in any way depreciate or mitigate the value and power of his wife."

And my personal fave, an oldie-but-goodie, Woman, You Better Know Your Place!

"I have been very careful, and am very careful, to treat my wife with that respect and reverence that is due her in performing that thing that is of most worth for a woman in this life to live the gospel, to be the wife and the mother of the children of a worthy holder of the priesthood."

Coming to a meetinghouse near you.

H.

[_Stormy Waters]

For the sake of my family still inside the church, I hope that he does not become the next prophet.

[_Aristotle Smith]

For the sake of my family still inside the church, I hope that he does not become the next prophet.

I hope he does. If for no other reason to see the absolute despair that will overtake the liberal, Sunstone, and Bloggernacle Mormons who have written off Boyd and his teachings for years because he wasn't the prophet.

[_Runtu]

Shame on you, H., for negatively focusing on two cherrypicked quotes. ;-)

[_Equality]

For the sake of my family still inside the church, I hope that he does not become the next prophet.

Why not? How is what he says any different from what Monson, Hinckley, Benson, Kimball said before him? Have they ever said anything to make you think they disagree wit Packer on the points he made yesterday that LDSToronto quoted above?

[_Stormy Waters]

Why not? How is what he says any different from what Monson, Hinckley, Benson, Kimball said before him? Have they ever said anything to make you think they disagree wit Packer on the points he made yesterday that LDSToronto quoted above?

I don't think they disagree on what what Packer said above, but Packer seems to be a 'fundamentalist Mormon'. He is responsible for more than his fair share of infamous quotations.

"There is a temptation for the writer or teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful."

"Oh, if I could teach you this one principle. A testimony is to be found in the bearing of it! Somewhere in your quest for spiritual knowledge, there is that “leap of faith,” as the philosophers call it."

"There is, however, something you should not do. Sometimes a young man does not understand. Perhaps he is encouraged by unwise or unworthy companions to tamper with that factory. He might fondle himself and open that release valve. This you shouldn't do, for if you do that, the little factory will speed up. You will then be tempted again and again to release it. You can quickly be subjected to a habit, one that is not worthy, one that will leave you feeling depressed and feeling guilty. Resist that temptation. Do not be guilty of tampering or playing with this sacred power of creation. Keep it in reserve for the time when it can be righteously employed."

in my opinion he tends to emphasize things that the other brethren tend to ignore.

[_Fence Sitter]

in my opinion he tends to emphasize things that the other brethren tend to ignore.

Packer is less concerned with how his audience will react to what he says then the other brethren. He is a throw back to McConkie in that he feels it is his job to tell people how to act and their job to follow what he says without question.

[_LDSToronto]

For the sake of my family still inside the church, I hope that he does not become the next prophet.

I hope he does. If for no other reason to see the absolute despair that will overtake the liberal, Sunstone, and Bloggernacle Mormons who have written off Boyd and his teachings for years because he wasn't the prophet.

Yup, my thoughts exactly.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqguTJr0kXs

[_Jason Bourne]

I hope he does. If for no other reason to see the absolute despair that will overtake the liberal, Sunstone, and Bloggernacle Mormons who have written off Boyd and his teachings for years because he wasn't the prophet.

Being a secretive liberal hypocrite of NOM I won't despair. Not one whit. Everyone was so worried when ETB became prophet yet he was very benign. If Packer is ever church Pres I imagine he will be too. But it is not likely he will be prophet. He is in his early 80s and not healthy at all. Course Monson is what, 86 and has diabetes so who knows?

But who cares? Most of what the prophets say is pretty much basis stuff. Rarely do you hear anything that would shake one up much. Hinckley was more open and accesible. Monson has been insulated. I think he talked the press once, when he was first installed as President.

All that said really, personally what the LDS leaders say and don't has little impact on me personally day by day. And I long ago gave up thinking I could persuade the Church in any way really.

Oh by the way, regarding Elder Packer, he recently talked at a 100 anniversary celebration of the seminary program. He once again alluded that we are no born with same sex feelings because that would destroy agency. Hmmmm, what about those born with mental handicaps or autism? Does that not impact their agency then as well? He also said do not tamper with the sacred life giving powers, not with someone else or alone. This was all published in the LDS Church news so that must make it all official.