Greg Smith's Defense of Boyd K. Packer

[_Blixa]

Consig,

I was at that conference session and did not perceive it as a backward step by the Church on gay issues.

President Packer was clearly very much in decline and could not remember the General Conference style guidelines (e.g., for quotations ["quote"--"unquote"] and scripture references) he'd been using for 45 years. He wasn't speaking officially for the Church, and wasn't even speaking particularly clearly or cogently for himself.

What I got out of the statement you quoted is that he didn't believe God would give anyone a temptation they couldn't resist, an idea taken from the Doctrine and Covenants.

There is no sense fighting with the man when he is neither the leader of the Church nor likely to long be speaking from its pulpit. If one of the posters on this board were 87 and in rapid decline, hopefully we'd all give him a break. I don't see why not to do the same for Boyd K. Packer.

Don

That is the kindest thing I've ever read about President Packer.

[_sock puppet]

Consig,

I was at that conference session and did not perceive it as a backward step by the Church on gay issues.

President Packer was clearly very much in decline and could not remember the General Conference style guidelines (e.g., for quotations ["quote"--"unquote"] and scripture references) he'd been using for 45 years. He wasn't speaking officially for the Church, and wasn't even speaking particularly clearly or cogently for himself.

What I got out of the statement you quoted is that he didn't believe God would give anyone a temptation they couldn't resist, an idea taken from the Doctrine and Covenants.

There is no sense fighting with the man when he is neither the leader of the Church nor likely to long be speaking from its pulpit. If one of the posters on this board were 87 and in rapid decline, hopefully we'd all give him a break. I don't see why not to do the same for Boyd K. Packer.

Don

Don, do you think organizationally there ought to be a change to keep the feebling of mind from having a lock on the prophet spot? Do you think that the gerontocracy needs to be re-tooled in its succession practices?

[_Equality]

Mormons don't believe, nor has any LDS prophet said, that everything that comes from a General Authority's lips during a conference talk is doctrinal or inspired . . . .

Don

Technically true, as it relates to all General Authorities. But the Prophets from Joseph Smith to the current President Monson, have claimed for themselves the title of Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and have told the Saints that the words of the Prophet are to be treated as if they are the words of Jesus Himself, who they claim is leading and guiding the church with a constant flow of revelation. Current church manuals teach this concept. Brigham Young said of his own words: "I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve. The people have the oracles of God continually." (Journal of Discourses, vol. 13, p. 95)

The church counsels members to carry the current conference addresses with their scriptures and treat them with a respect equal to that of the scriptures. I have heard apologists argue that the apostles' words at General Conference might be their own opinions mingled with inspiration, but I have never found such an argument from an LDS church President or a church publication. Perhaps you could point us to one?

[_Equality]

If one of the posters on this board were 87 and in rapid decline, hopefully we'd all give him a break. I don't see why not to do the same for Boyd K. Packer.

Don

We probably would. But none (well, very few) of the posters her claim to be the President of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles, God's exclusive recipients of revelation for the whole world. If Packer's not cut out to do the job, perhaps he should resign his position in the Quorum so someone with the ability to receive and communicate God's messages without corruption can step up and do the job.

[_Bob Loblaw]

We probably would. But none (well, very few) of the posters her claim to be the President of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles, God's exclusive recipients of revelation for the whole world. If Packer's not cut out to do the job, perhaps he should resign his position in the Quorum so someone with the ability to receive and communicate God's messages without corruption can step up and do the job.

I'd be inclined to cut him some slack if he said something that was inconsistent with everything he's been saying for 40 years, but he didn't.

[_Equality]

If it wanted to change its doctrine on the subject to endorse the idea that homosexuality can be changed, it could do so in a much clearer way than having an ailing apostle give a disjointed talk at a single conference.

Don

Where does the church say that homosexuality canNOT be changed? Your statement implies that that is current church doctrine. I think current church doctrine is that there is no such thing as homosexuality, only the "challenge" of "same-sex attraction," which can be overcome through faith int he atonement. Where has the church proclaimed the doctrine that homosexuality is an innate characteristic that can be changed.

[_Sophocles]

Whenever I hear apologetic excuses for the general authorities I'm reminded of this comic:



The missionaries are out selling modern prophets, seers, and revelators, charging 10% plus offerings, expenses, and time, yet the church is delivering barely lucid old men who are not long for this world, whose pronouncements are not necessarily doctrinal, and asks that we all just cut them a little slack.

[_schreech]

I'd be inclined to cut him some slack if he said something that was inconsistent with everything he's been saying for 40 years, but he didn't.

That's exactly what i was thinking. Suggesting that his age is the reason for his recent, bigoted ramblings doesn't really explain why he has been saying the same things for the last several decades...On top of that, I think it would be hilarious if someone actually had the chance to sit down with Boyd and suggest to him that maybe his recent conference addresses were not "inspired" or meant to be taken in the way he gave them - I am sure he thinks that everything that comes out of his mouth in conference is inspired considering his "special witness" status as an apostle of elohim.

[_Cylon]

The missionaries are out selling modern prophets, seers, and revelators, charging 10% plus offerings, expenses, and time, yet the church is delivering barely lucid old men who are not long for this world, whose pronouncements are not necessarily doctrinal, and asks that we all just cut them a little slack.

That's a brilliant synopsis, Sophocles.

[_son of Ishmael]

Mormons don't believe, nor has any LDS prophet said, that everything that comes from a General Authority's lips during a conference talk is doctrinal or inspired..

Ok, help me out. Can you point to anything said by a GA in that last ten years that is generally believed to be doctrinal or inspired and is not just a re-hash of something that someone else said?