Tag: Dallin H. Oaks

  • Oaks Abortion

    Oaks Abortion

    the practice of elective abortion is fundamentally contrary to the Lord’s injunction, “Thou shallt not … kill, nor do anything like unto it

    Dallin H. Oaks
    1991 Suppliement to the 1989 General Handbook of Instructions, P 1

    The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[e] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.

    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%205&version=NIV & https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/ot/num/5.p27-28?lang=eng#p27

  • Asked to Wear Face Masks in Temple

    Asked to Wear Face Masks in Temple

    We are grateful that in recent months, some level of ordinance work has resumed in every temple. Our desire is to keep temples open.

    As cases of COVID-19 increase in many areas, we want to do everything possible to allow temples to remain open. Therefore, effective immediately, all temple patrons and workers are asked to wear face masks at all times while in the temple. These safety protocols are temporary, based on COVID-19 conditions, and will be rescinded as soon as circumstances permit.

    Our urging Church members to be vaccinated and to protect themselves and others from the spread of disease has precedent. Prior First Presidencies shared similar messages in 1900 about smallpox and in 1957 regarding polio. Please do all you can to protect yourself and others so the work of the Lord on both sides of the veil can move forward.

    The First Presidency Asks Latter-day Saints Worldwide to Wear Face Masks in Temples
    First Presidency (Russell M. Nelson, Dallin H. Oaks, and Henry B. Eyring)
    https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/first-presidency-temple-masks-letter
  • 2021 BYU University Conference

    2021 BYU University Conference

    3 August 2021, BYU University Conference 1

    The Second Half of the Second Century

    BYU Annual University Conference
    August 23, 2021
    By Elder Jeffrey R. Holland

    Someone once told me that the young speak of the future because they have no past, while the elderly speak of the past because they have no future. Although it damages that little aphorism, I come to you as the veritable Ancient of Days to speak of the future of BYU, but a future anchored in our distinctive past. If I have worded that right, it means I can talk about anything I want.

    I am grateful that the full university family is gathered today — faculty, staff, and administration. Regardless of your job description, I am going to speak to all of you as teachers because at BYU that is what all of us are. Thank you for being faithful role models in that regard.

    I can’t be certain, but I think that it was in the summer of 1948 when I had my first BYU experience. I would have been 7 years old. We were driving back to St. George from one of our rare trips to Salt Lake City. As we came down old highway 91, I saw high on the side of one of the hills a huge block “Y” — white and bold and beautiful.

    I don’t know how to explain that moment, but it was a true epiphany for a 7-year-old. If I had seen that “Y” on the drive up or any other time, I couldn’t remember it. But I saw it that day, and I believe it was a revelation from God. I somehow knew that bold letter meant something special and that it would one day play a significant role in my life. When I asked my mother what it meant, she said it was the emblem of a university. I thought about that for a moment then said quietly, “Well, it must be the greatest university in the world.”

    My chance to actually get on campus came in June 1952, four years after that first sighting. That summer I accompanied my parents to one of those early “Leadership Weeks,” a precursor to what is now the immensely popular “Education Week” held on campus. That means I came here for my first BYU experience 69 years ago with a preview of that four years earlier. If anyone in this audience has been coming to this campus longer than that, please come forward and give this talk. Otherwise, sit still and be patient. As Elizabeth Taylor said to her eight husbands, “I won’t be keeping you long.”

    My point, dear friends, is simply this: I have loved BYU for nearly three-fourths of a century. Only my service in and testimony of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, including my marriage and the beautiful children it has given us, have affected me as profoundly as has my decision to attend Brigham Young University. In so testifying, I represent literally hundreds of thousands of other students who say the same thing.

    So, for legions of us over the years, I say: “Thank you for what you do. Thank you for classes taught and meals served and grounds so well kept. Thank you for office hours and lab experiments and testimonies shared — gifts given to little people like me so we could grow up to be big people like you. Thank you for choosing to be at BYU because your choice affected our choice and, like Mr. Frost’s poetic path, “that has made all the difference.”[1]

    I asked President Worthen for a sample of the good things that have been happening of late, and I was delighted at the sheaf of items he gave me — small type, single-spaced lines — everything from academic recognitions and scholarly rankings to athletic success and the reach of BYUtv. Karl G. Maeser would be as proud as I was.

    But Kevin and I both know those aren’t the real success stories of BYU. These are rather, as some say of ordinances in the Church, “outward signs of an inward grace.” The real successes at BYU are the personal experiences that thousands here have had, personal experiences difficult to document or categorize or list. Nevertheless, these are so powerful in their impact on the heart and mind that they have changed us forever.

    I run a risk in citing any examples beyond my own but let me mention just one or two.

    One of our colleagues seated here this morning speaks of his first semester, pre-mission enrollment in my friend Wilford Griggs’s History of Civilization class. But this was going to be civilization seen through a BYU lens. So as preambles to the course, Wilf had the students read President Spencer W. Kimball’s “Second Century Address”[2] and the first chapter of Hugh Nibley’s Approaching Zion.[3]

    Taken together, our very literate friend says these two readings “forged an indestructible union in my mind and heart between two soaring ideals — that of a consecrated university with that of a holy city. Zion, I came to believe, would be a city with a school [and I would add, a temple, creating] something of a celestial college town, or perhaps a college kingdom.”

    After his mission, our faculty friend returned to Provo where he fell under the soul-expanding spell of John Tanner, “the platonic ideal of a BYU professor — superbly qualified in every secular sense, totally committed to the kingdom, and absolutely effervescing with love for the Savior, His students, and His subject. He moved seamlessly from careful teacher analysis to powerful personal testimony. He knew scores of passages from Milton and other poets by heart, [yet] verses of scripture flowed, if anything, even more freely from the abundance of his consecrated heart: I was unfailingly edified by the passion of his teaching and the eloquence of his example.”[4]

    Why would such an one come to teach at BYU after a truly distinguished post-graduate experience that might well have taken him to virtually any university in America? Because, our colleague says, “In a coming day the citizens of Zion ‘shall come forth with songs of everlasting joy’ [Moses 7:53]. I hope,” he writes, “to help my students hear that chorus in the distance and to lend their own voices, in time, to its swelling refrain.”[5]

    Such are the experiences we hope to provide our students at BYU, though probably not always so poetically expressed. Then, imagine the pain that comes with a memo like this one I recently received. These are just a half-dozen lines from a two-page document:

    “You should know,” the writer says, “that some people in the extended community are feeling abandoned and betrayed by BYU. It seems that some professors (at least the vocal ones in the media) are supporting ideas that many of us feel are contradictory to gospel principles, making it appear to be about like any other university our sons and daughters could have attended. Several parents have said they no longer want to send their children here or donate to the school.

    “Please don’t think I’m opposed to people thinking differently about policies and ideas,” the writer continues. “I’m not. But I would hope that BYU professors would be bridging those gaps between faith and intellect and would be sending out students that are ready to do the same in loving, intelligent and articulate ways. Yet, I fear that some faculty are not supportive of the Church’s doctrines and policies and choose to criticize them publicly. There are consequences to this. After having served a full-time mission and marrying her husband in the temple, a friend of mine recently left the church. In her graduation statement on a social media post, she credited [such and such a BYU program and its faculty] with the radicalizing of her attitudes and the destruction of her faith.”[6]

    Fortunately, we don’t get many of those letters, but this one isn’t unique. Several of my colleagues get the same kind, with most of them ultimately being forwarded to poor President Worthen. Now, most of what happens on this campus is wonderful. That is why I began as I did, with my own undying love of this place. But every so often we need a reminder of the challenge we constantly face here.

    Here is what I said on this subject exactly 41 years ago almost to the day. I had been president for all of three weeks.

    I said then and I say now that if we are an extension of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, taking a significant amount of sacred tithes and other precious human resources, all of which might well be expended in other worthy causes, surely our integrity demands that our lives be absolutely consistent with and characteristic of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. At a university there will always be healthy debate regarding a whole syllabus full of issues. But until “we all come [to] the unity of the faith, and . . . [have grown to] the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ,”[7] our next best achievement will be to stay in harmony with the Lord’s anointed, those whom He has designated to declare Church doctrine and to guide Brigham Young University as its trustees.[8]

    In 2014, seven years ago, then-Elder Russell M. Nelson came to campus in this same setting. His remarks were relatively brief, but tellingly he said:

    “With the Church growing more rapidly in the less prosperous countries, we . . . must conserve sacred funds more carefully than ever before.

    “At BYU we must ally ourselves even more closely with the work of our Heavenly Father. . . .

    “A college education for our people is a sacred responsibility, [but] it is not essential for eternal life.”[9]

    A statement like that gets my attention, particularly because just a short time later President Nelson chairs our Board, holds our purse strings, and has the final “yea” or “nay” on every proposal we make from a new research lab, to more undergrad study space, to approving a new pickup for the physical facilities staff! Russell M. Nelson is very, very good at listening to us. We who sit with him every day have learned the value of listening carefully to him.

    Three years later, 2017, Elder Dallin H. Oaks, not then but soon to be in the First Presidency where he would sit, only one chair — one heartbeat — away from the same position President Nelson now has, quoted our colleague Elder Neal A. Maxwell who had said:

    “In a way[,] [Latter-day Saint] scholars at BYU and elsewhere are a little bit like the builders of the temple in Nauvoo, who worked with a trowel in one hand and a musket in the other. Today scholars building the temple of learning must also pause on occasion to defend the kingdom. I personally think,” Elder Maxwell went on to say, “this is one of the reasons the Lord established and maintains this university. The dual role of builder and defender is unique and ongoing. I am grateful we have scholars today who can handle, as it were, both trowels and muskets.”[10]

    Then Elder Oaks said challengingly, “I would like to hear a little more musket fire from this temple of learning.”[11] He said this in a way that could have applied to a host of topics in various departments, but the one he specifically mentioned was the doctrine of the family and defending marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Little did he know that while many would hear his appeal, especially the School of Family Life who moved quickly and visibly to assist, some others fired their muskets all right, but unfortunately didn’t always aim at those hostile to the Church. A couple of stray rounds even went north of the point of the mountain!

    My beloved brothers and sisters, “a house divided against itself . . . cannot stand,”[12] and I will go to my grave pleading that this institution not only stands but stands unquestionably committed to its unique academic mission and to the Church that sponsors it. We hope it isn’t a surprise to you that your Trustees are not deaf or blind to the feelings that swirl around marriage and the whole same-sex topic on campus. I and many of my Brethren have spent more time and shed more tears on this subject than we could ever adequately convey to you this morning, or any morning. We have spent hours discussing what the doctrine of the Church can and cannot provide the individuals and families struggling over this difficult issue. So, it is with scar tissue of our own that we are trying to avoid — and hope all will try to avoid — language, symbols, and situations that are more divisive than unifying at the very time we want to show love for all of God’s children.

    If a student commandeers a graduation podium intended to represent everyone getting diplomas in order to announce his personal sexual orientation, what might another speaker feel free to announce the next year until eventually anything goes? What might commencement come to mean — or not mean — if we push individual license over institutional dignity for very long? Do we simply end up with more divisiveness in our culture than we already have — and we already have too much everywhere.

    In that spirit, let me go no farther before declaring unequivocally my love and that of my Brethren for those who live with this same-sex challenge and so much complexity that goes with it. Too often the world has been unkind, in many instances crushingly cruel, to these our brothers and sisters. Like many of you, we have spent hours with them, and wept and prayed and wept again in an effort to offer love and hope while keeping the gospel strong and the obedience to commandments evident in every individual life.

    But it will assist everyone in providing such help if things can be kept in some proportion and balance in the process. For example, we have to be careful that love and empathy do not get interpreted as condoning and advocacy, or that orthodoxy and loyalty to principle not be interpreted as unkindness or disloyalty to people. As near as I can tell, Christ never once withheld His love from anyone, but He also never once said to anyone, “Because I love you, you are exempt from keeping my commandments.” We are tasked with trying to strike that same sensitive, demanding balance in our lives.

    Musket fire? Yes, we will always need defenders of the faith, but “friendly fire” is a tragedy — and from time to time the Church, its leaders and some of our colleagues within the university community have taken such fire on this campus. And sometimes it isn’t friendly — wounding students and the parents of students who are confused about what so much recent flag-waving and parade-holding on this issue means. Beloved friends, this kind of confusion and conflict ought not to be. There are better ways to move toward crucially important goals in these very difficult matters — ways that show empathy and understanding for everyone while maintaining loyalty to prophetic leadership and devotion to revealed doctrine. My Brethren have made the case for the metaphor of musket fire, which I have endorsed yet again today. There will continue to be those who oppose our teachings and with that will continue the need to define, document, and defend the faith. But we do all look forward to the day when we can “beat our swords into plowshares, and [our] spears into pruning hooks,” and at least on this subject, “learn war [no] more.”[13] And while I have focused on this same-sex topic this morning more than I would have liked, I pray you will see it as emblematic of a lot of issues our students and community face in this complex, contemporary world of ours.

    But I digress! Back to the blessings of a school in Zion! Do you see the beautiful parallel between the unfolding of the Restoration and the prophetic development of BYU, notwithstanding that both will have critics along the way? Like the Church itself, BYU has grown in spiritual strength, in the number of people it reaches and serves, and in its unique place among other institutions of higher education. It has grown in national and international reputation. More and more of its faculty are distinguishing themselves and, even more importantly, so are more and more of its students.

    Reinforcing the fact that so many do understand exactly what that unfolding dream of BYU is, not long ago one of your number wrote to me this marvelous description of what he thought was the “call” to those who serve at BYU:

    “The Lord’s call [to those of us who serve at BYU] is a . . . call to create learning experiences of unprecedented depth, quality and impact. . . . As good as BYU is and has been, this is a call to do [better]. It is . . . a call to educate many more students, to more . . . effectively help them become true disciples of Jesus Christ, to prepare them to . . . lead in their families, in the Church, in their [professions, and] in a world filled with commotion. . . . But [answering this call] . . . cannot be [done successfully] without His . . . help . . . I believe,” the writer concludes,” that help will come according to the faith and obedience of the tremendously good people of BYU.”[14]

    I agree enthusiastically with such a sense of calling here and with that reference to and confidence in “the tremendously good people of BYU.”[15] Let me underscore that idea of such a call by returning to President Kimball’s “Second Century Address.”

    Our bright, budding new Commissioner of Education, Elder Clark Gilbert, is my traveling companion today. You may be certain that he loves this institution, his alma mater, deeply and brings to his assignment a reverence for its mission and message. As part of his introduction to you, I am asking Elder Gilbert to come on campus on any calendar he and President Worthen can work out, and whether those visits are formal or casual or both, I hope they can accomplish two things: First of all, I hope you will come to see quickly the remarkable strengths Elder Gilbert brings to his calling, even as he learns more about the flagship of his fleet and why our effort at a Church Educational System would be a failure without the health, success, and participation of BYU. Second, noting that we are just a few years short of halfway through those second hundred years of which President Kimball spoke, I think it would be fascinating to know if we are, in fact, making any headway on the challenges he laid before us and of which Elder David Bednar reminded the BYU Leadership team just a few weeks ago.

    When you look at President Kimball’s talk again, a copy of which will be distributed following this conference, may I ask you to pay particular attention to that sweet prophet’s effort to ask that we be unique. In his discourse, President Kimball used the word “unique” eight times, and “special” eight times. It seems clear to me in my 73 years of loving it that BYU will become an “educational Mt. Everest” only to the degree it embraces its uniqueness, its singularity.[16] We could mimic every other university in the world until we got a bloody nose in the effort and the world would still say, “BYU who?” No, we must have the will to stand alone, if necessary, being a university second to none in its role primarily as an undergraduate teaching institution that is unequivocally true to the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ in the process. If at a future time that mission means foregoing some professional affiliations and certifications, then so be it. There may come a day when the price we are asked to pay for such association is simply too high, too inconsistent with who we are. No one wants it to come to that, but, if it does, we will pursue our own destiny, a “destiny [that] is not a matter of chance; [but largely] a matter of choice; . . . not a thing to be waited for, [but] a thing to be [envisioned and] achieved.”[17]

    “Mom, what is that big ‘Y’ on that mountain?”

    “It stands for the university here in Provo: Brigham Young University.”

    “Well, it must be the greatest university in the world.”

    And so for Jeff Holland, it is. To help you pursue that destiny in the only real way I know how to help, I leave an apostolic blessing on every one of you as you start another school year. In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and with gratitude for His holy priesthood, I bless you personally, bless the students who will come under your influence, and bless the university as a campus-wide endeavor. I bless you that profound personal faith will be your watchword and the unending blessings of personal rectitude will be your eternal reward. I bless your professional work that it will be admired by your peers, and I bless your devotion to gospel truths that it will be the saving grace in some student’s life. I bless your families that those you hope will be faithful in keeping their covenants will be saved at least in part because you have been faithful in keeping yours. Light conquers darkness. Truth triumphs against error. Goodness is victorious over evil in the end.

    I bless each one of you with every righteous desire of your heart and thank you for giving your love and loyalty to BYU. Please. From one who owes so much to this school and has loved her so deeply for so long, keep her not only standing but standing for what she uniquely and prophetically was meant to be. May the rest of higher education “see your good works, and glorify [our] Father which is in heaven.”[18] I pray, in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

    [1] See Robert Frost, “The Road Not Taken,” Mountain Interval (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1916), 9, Google Books, accessed Aug. 12, 2021.

    [2] Spencer W. Kimball, “Second Century Address,” BYU Studies Quarterly vol. 16, no. 4 (Oct. 1976): 455–457, accessed Aug. 12, 2021, available at https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol16/iss4/2.

    [3] Hugh Nibley, “Our Glory or Our Condemnation,” Approaching Zion, vol. 9 of The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, ed. by Don E. Norton(Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1989), 1–24.

    [4] Personal correspondence, August 1, 2021.

    [5] Personal correspondence, August 1, 2021. Scripture quoted is Moses 7:53.

    [6] Personal correspondence, June 10, 2021

    [7] Ephesians 4:13.

    [8] See Jeffrey R. Holland, “The Bond of Charity,” Annual University Conference, Aug. 26, 1980.

    [9] Russell M. Nelson, “Controlled Growth,” BYU Leadership Meeting, Aug. 25, 2014.

    [10] Neal A. Maxwell, “Blending Research and Revelation,” remarks at the BYU President’s Leadership Council meetings, 19 March 2004; quoted in Dallin H. Oaks, “Challenges to the Mission of Brigham Young University,” Commencement Address, Apr. 21, 2017.

    [11] Dallin H. Oaks, “It Hasn’t Been Easy,” BYU commencement address, Aug. 14, 2014, quoted in Dallin H. Oaks, “Challenges to the Mission of Brigham Young University,” BYU commencement address, April 2017.

    [12] Mark 3:25.

    [13] Isaiah 2:4.

    [14] Personal correspondence, June 21, 2021.

    [15] Ibid.

    [16] See Spencer W. Kimball, “Second Century Address,” BYU Studies Quarterly vol. 16, no. 4 (Oct. 1976): 455, accessed Aug. 12, 2021, available at https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol16/iss4/2.

    [17] William Jennings Bryan, Speeches of William Jennings Bryan vol. 2 (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, Co., 1913), 11, Google Books, accessed Aug. 12, 2021.

    [18] Matthew 5:16; see also 3 Nephi 12:16.

    References

    References
    1 Elder Jeffrey R. Holland Urges BYU to Embrace Its Uniqueness, Stay True to the Savior – https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/elder-jeffrey-r-holland-2021-byu-university-conference#_edn11
  • First Presidency Discontinued and Impressed?

    First Presidency Discontinued and Impressed?

    Beginning with October’s general conference and continuing thereafter, the Saturday evening sessions will be discontinued.

    Salt Lake City News Release, First Presidency Announces Changes to General Conference – 7 June 2021
    https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/general-conference-saturday-evening-session-update

    Therefore, after additional study and prayer, we have felt impressed to continue to hold the Saturday evening session of general conference

    Salt Lake City First Presidency Letter, The First Presidency Continues the Saturday Evening Session of General Conference – 27 July 2021
    https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/general-conference-saturday-evening-session-update

  • Conference Report October 2020

    Conference Report October 2020

    Saturday Morning Session

    Russell M. Nelson 5:07

    David A. Bednar 15:19

    Scott D. Whiting 10:21

    Michelle D. Craig 9:44

    Quentin L. Cook 14:44:00

    Ronald A. Rasband 14:16:00

    Dallin H. Oaks 16:19:00

    Saturday Afternoon Session

    D. Todd Christofferson 15:11:00

    Steven J. Lund 9:56:00

    Gerrit W. Gong 14:44:00

    W. Christopher Waddell 10:07:00

    Matthew S. Holland 9:46:00

    William K. Jackson 10:09:00

    Dieter F. Uchtdorf 15:17:00

    General Women’s Session

    Sharon Eubank 10:06

    Rebecca M. Craven 9:37

    Cristina B. Franco 9:36

    Henry B. Eyring 12:53:00

    Dallin H. Oaks 12:10:00

    Russell M. Nelson 16:24:00

    Sunday Morning Session

    M. Russell Ballard 15:01:00

    Lisa L. Harkness 11:00

    Ulisses Soares 14:47:00

    Carlos A. Godoy 10:45:00

    Neil L. Andersen 15:01:00

    Russell M. Nelson 18:51:00

    Sunday Afternoon Session

    Henry B. Eyring 15:59:00

    Jeremy R. Jaggi 10:15:00

    Gary E. Stevenson 14:07:00

    Milton Camargo 10:09:00

    Dale G. Renlund 13:27:00

    Kelly R. Johnson 9:53:00

    Jeffrey R. Holland 14:18:00

    Russell M. Nelson 5:26:00

  • Conference Summary April 2020

    Conference Summary April 2020

    From the April 2020 General Conference: 1

    Saturday morning session

    Russell M. Nelson 6:40
    M. Russell Ballard 18:46
    James R. Rasband 9:46
    Joy D. Jones 11:25
    Neil L. Andersen 16:43
    Douglas D. Holmes 11:33
    Henry B. Eyring 15:43

    Saturday afternoon session

    Ulisses Soares 17:12
    John A. McCune 9:10
    Gérald Caussé 10:42
    Dale G. Renlund 14:39
    Benjamin M. Z. Tai 9:01
    Gary E. Stevenson 16:22

    Saturday evening session

    Gerrit W. Gong 14:56
    Laudy Ruth Kaouk Alvarez 6:07
    Enzo Serge Petelo 6:25
    Jean B. Bingham 13:41
    Henry B. Eyring 14:52
    Dallin H. Oaks 14:21
    Russell M. Nelson 11:27

    Sunday morning session

    Ronald A. Rasband 14:51
    Bonnie H. Cordon 10:28
    Jeffrey R. Holland 17:45
    David A. Bednar 15:01
    Russell M. Nelson 20:27

    Sunday afternoon session

    Dallin H. Oaks 15:48
    Quentin L. Cook 13:53
    Ricardo P. Gimenez  10:50
    Dieter F. Uchtdorf 16:38
    L. Whitney Clayton 10:59
    D. Todd Christofferson 14:13
    Russell M. Nelson 9:11

    References

    References
    1 April 2020 General Conference – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/general-conference?lang=eng
  • In unison

    In unison

    Excerpt from the April 2020 General Conference ‘Hosanna Shout’ instruction given by Russell M. Nelson: 1

    Each one participating takes a clean white handkerchief, holding it by one corner and waves it in unison, while saying in unison, “hosanna, hosanna, hosanna to God and the Lamb” repeated three times followed by “amen, amen and amen”.

    References

    References
    1 April 2020 General Conference ‘Hosanna Shout’ instruction given by Russell M. Nelson – https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/general-conference/2020/04/media/6147256739001?lang=eng
  • Prohibited

    Prohibited

    General Authorities and General Officers of the LDS Church: 1

    NAMECALLING
    Russell M. NelsonPresident of the Church
    Dallin H. OaksFirst Presidency
    Henry B. EyringFirst Presidency
    M. Russell BallardQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    Jeffrey R. HollandQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    Dieter F. UchtdorfQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    David A. BednarQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    Quentin L. CookQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    D. Todd ChristoffersonQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    Neil L. AndersenQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    Ronald A. RasbandQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    Gary E. StevensonQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    Dale G. RenlundQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    Gerrit W. GongQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    Ulisses SoaresQuorum of the Twelve Apostles
    L. Whitney ClaytonPresidency of Seventy
    Patrick KearonPresidency of Seventy
    Carl B. CookPresidency of Seventy
    Robert C. GayPresidency of Seventy
    Terence M. VinsonPresidency of Seventy
    José A. TeixeiraPresidency of Seventy
    Carlos A. GodoyPresidency of Seventy
    Marcos A. AidukaitisGeneral Authority Seventy
    Rubén V. AlliaudGeneral Authority Seventy
    Jose L. AlonsoGeneral Authority Seventy
    Jorge M. AlvaradoGeneral Authority Seventy
    Ian S. ArdernGeneral Authority Seventy
    W. Mark BassettGeneral Authority Seventy
    David S. BaxterGeneral Authority Seventy
    Hans T. BoomGeneral Authority Seventy
    Shayne M. BowenGeneral Authority Seventy
    Mark A. BraggGeneral Authority Seventy
    L. Todd BudgeGeneral Authority Seventy
    Yoon Hwan ChoiGeneral Authority Seventy
    Craig C. ChristensenGeneral Authority Seventy
    Weatherford T. ClaytonGeneral Authority Seventy
    Valeri V. CordónGeneral Authority Seventy
    Joaquin E. CostaGeneral Authority Seventy
    LeGrand R. Curtis Jr.General Authority Seventy
    Massimo De FeoGeneral Authority Seventy
    Benjamin De HoyosGeneral Authority Seventy
    Edward DubeGeneral Authority Seventy
    Kevin R. DuncanGeneral Authority Seventy
    David F. EvansGeneral Authority Seventy
    Enrique R. FalabellaGeneral Authority Seventy
    Eduardo GavarretGeneral Authority Seventy
    Ricardo P. GiménezGeneral Authority Seventy
    Taylor G. GodoyGeneral Authority Seventy
    Christoffel GoldenGeneral Authority Seventy
    Walter F. GonzálezGeneral Authority Seventy
    Brook P. HalesGeneral Authority Seventy
    Allen D. HaynieGeneral Authority Seventy
    Paul V. JohnsonGeneral Authority Seventy
    Peter M. JohnsonGeneral Authority Seventy
    Jörg KlebingatGeneral Authority Seventy
    Joni L. KochGeneral Authority Seventy
    Erich W. KopischkeGeneral Authority Seventy
    Richard J. MaynesGeneral Authority Seventy
    John A. McCuneGeneral Authority Seventy
    Peter F. MeursGeneral Authority Seventy
    Hugo MontoyaGeneral Authority Seventy
    Marcus B. NashGeneral Authority Seventy
    K. Brett NattressGeneral Authority Seventy
    S. Gifford NielsenGeneral Authority Seventy
    Brent H. NielsonGeneral Authority Seventy
    S. Mark PalmerGeneral Authority Seventy
    Adilson de Paula ParrellaGeneral Authority Seventy
    Kevin W. PearsonGeneral Authority Seventy
    Anthony D. PerkinsGeneral Authority Seventy
    Paul B. PieperGeneral Authority Seventy
    John C. Pingree Jr.General Authority Seventy
    Rafael E. PinoGeneral Authority Seventy
    James R. RasbandGeneral Authority Seventy
    Michael T. RingwoodGeneral Authority Seventy
    Lynn G. RobbinsGeneral Authority Seventy
    Gary B. SabinGeneral Authority Seventy
    Evan A. SchmutzGeneral Authority Seventy
    Joseph W. SitatiGeneral Authority Seventy
    Vern P. StanfillGeneral Authority Seventy
    Benjamin M. Z. TaiGeneral Authority Seventy
    Brian K. TaylorGeneral Authority Seventy
    Michael John U. TehGeneral Authority Seventy
    Juan A. UcedaGeneral Authority Seventy
    Arnulfo ValenzuelaGeneral Authority Seventy
    Taniela B. WakoloGeneral Authority Seventy
    Alan R. WalkerGeneral Authority Seventy
    Scott D. WhitingGeneral Authority Seventy
    Chi Hong (Sam) WongGeneral Authority Seventy
    Kazuhiko YamashitaGeneral Authority Seventy
    Jorge F. ZeballosGeneral Authority Seventy
    Steven R. BangerterGeneral Authority Seventy
    Randall K. BennettGeneral Authority Seventy
    Matthew L. CarpenterGeneral Authority Seventy
    J. Devn CornishGeneral Authority Seventy
    Timothy J. DychesGeneral Authority Seventy
    Randy D. FunkGeneral Authority Seventy
    Jack N. GerardGeneral Authority Seventy
    Kevin S. HamiltonGeneral Authority Seventy
    Mathias HeldGeneral Authority Seventy
    David P. HomerGeneral Authority Seventy
    Larry S. KacherGeneral Authority Seventy
    Hugo E. MartinezGeneral Authority Seventy
    James B. MartinoGeneral Authority Seventy
    Kyle S. McKayGeneral Authority Seventy
    Adrián OchoaGeneral Authority Seventy
    Juan Pablo VillarGeneral Authority Seventy
    Takashi WadaGeneral Authority Seventy
    Gérald CausséPresiding Bishopric
    Dean M. DaviesPresiding Bishopric
    W. Christopher WaddellPresiding Bishopric
    Jean B. BinghamRelief Society General Presidency
    Sharon EubankRelief Society General Presidency
    Reyna I. AburtoRelief Society General Presidency
    Bonnie H. CordonYoung Women General Presidency
    Michelle CraigYoung Women General Presidency
    Becky CravenYoung Women General Presidency
    Joy D. JonesPrimary General Presidency
    Lisa L. HarknessPrimary General Presidency
    Cristina B. FrancoPrimary General Presidency
    Mark L. PaceSunday School General Presidency
    Milton CamargoSunday School General Presidency
    Jan E. NewmanSunday School General Presidency
    Stephen W. OwenYoung Men General Presidency
    Douglas D. HolmesYoung Men General Presidency
    M. Joseph BroughYoung Men General Presidency

    References

    References
    1 General Authorities and General Officers –https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/leaders?lang=eng
  • Serious threat

    Serious threat

    Excerpt from a Dallin H. Oaks’ Speech Given at Chapman University School of Law, February 4, 2011: 1

    “Along with many others, I see a serious threat to the freedom of religion in the current assertion of a “civil right” of homosexuals to be free from religious preaching against their relationships.”

    References

    References
    1 Transcript of Elder Dallin H. Oaks’ Speech Given at Chapman University School of Law – https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/elder-oaks-religious-freedom-Chapman-University
  • 2019 General Conference

    2019 General Conference

    2019 General Conference 1

    Saturday Morning Session

    Jeffrey R. Holland – 14:46
    Terence M. Vinson – 10:54
    Stephen W. Owen – 10:45
    D. Todd Christofferson – 14:32
    Michelle Craig – 10:28
    Dale G. Renlund – 13:52
    Dallin H. Oaks – 14:47

    Saturday Afternoon Session

    David A. Bednar – 15:59
    Rubén V. Alliaud – 9:35
    Russell M. Nelson – 4:02
    Quentin L. Cook – 12:29
    Mark L. Pace – 10:41
    L. Todd Budge – 10:23
    Jorge M. Alvarado – 10:34
    Ronald A. Rasband – 14:39

    General Women’s Session

    Reyna I. Aburto – 11:32
    Lisa Harkness – 9:53
    Bonnie H. Cordon – 13:04
    Henry B. Eyring – 12:17
    Dallin H. Oaks – 12:47
    Russell M. Nelson – 18:17

    Sunday Morning Session
    Gerrit W. Gong – 15:14
    Cristina B. Franco – 11:15
    Dieter F. Uchtdorf – 17:58
    Walter F. González – 11:54
    Gary E. Stevenson – 15:14
    Russell M. Nelson – 18:27

    Sunday Afternoon Session
    Henry B. Eyring – 18:56
    Hans T. Boom – 8:51
    M. Russell Ballard – 15:36
    Peter M. Johnson – 10:07
    Ulisses Soares – 14:47
    Elder Neil L. Andersen – 13:28
    Russell M. Nelson – 11:44

    References

    References
    1 https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/general-conference
  • Culture of Evil

    Culture of Evil

    Excerpt from a June 11, 2019 BYU Hawaii Devotional by Dallin H. Oaks: 1

    We live in stressful times.  For some young people the stresses are financial:  loss of employment or home or financial security.  For others, the stresses are associated with painful separations from those we love, such as caused by divorce of parents or other threats to personal security.  We also have the challenge of living in a godless and increasingly amoral generation.  More and more publicized voices deny or doubt the existence of God.  More and more support the idea that all authority and all rules of behavior are man-made and can be accepted or rejected as one chooses, each person being free to decide for himself or herself what is right and wrong.

    Along with these challenges—and caused by them—we are confronted by a culture of evil and personal wickedness in the world.  This includes:

    Dishonesty

    Pornography

    Perversions

    The diminishing of marriage and childbearing

    The increasing frequency and power of the culture and phenomenon of lesbian, gay, and transgender lifestyles and values

    Finally, you live in a culture that focuses on individual rights and desires rather than the responsibilities and cooperative efforts that have built our societies.

    References

  • April 2019 General Conference

    April 2019 General Conference

    Reference LDS.org:1

     

    Saturday Morning Session

    Ulisses Soares – 15:11
    Becky Craven – 12:23
    Brook P. Hales – 12:39
    Dieter F. Uchtdorf – 17:29
    W. Christopher Waddell – 11:52
    Henry B. Eyring – 19:05

    Saturday Afternoon Session

    M. Russell Ballard – 14:28
    Mathias Held – 10:21
    Neil L. Andersen – 15:15
    Takashi Wada – 9:37
    David P. Homer – 10:19
    Jeffrey R. Holland – 15:58

    Priesthood Session

    Gary E. Stevenson – 15:21
    Carl B. Cook – 10:59
    Kim B. Clark – 10:55
    Henry B. Eyring – 12:57
    Dallin H. Oaks – 11:44
    Russell M. Nelson – 14:57

    Sunday Morning Session

    Dale G. Renlund – 15:10
    Sharon L. Eubank – 11:29
    Quentin L. Cook – 15:23
    D. Todd Christofferson – 15:16
    Tad R. Callister – 11:46
    Russell M. Nelson – 17:50

    Sunday Afternoon Session

    Dallin H. Oaks – 15:27
    Juan Pablo Villar – 10:48
    Gerrit W. Gong – 15:19
    David A. Bednar – 16:27
    Kyle S. McKay – 11:39
    Ronald A. Rasband – 15:58
    Russell M. Nelson – 6:40

    References

    References
    1 April 2019, General Conference – https://www.lds.org/general-conference?lang=eng
  • 2018 General Conference

    2018 General Conference

    Information taken from ‘October 2018 General Conference’ on LDS.org: 1

    Saturday Morning Session
    Russell M. Nelson — 6:37
    Quentin L. Cook — 16:13
    M. Joseph Brough — 9:51
    Steven R. Bangerter — 11:11
    Ronald A. Rasband — 15:41
    David A. Bednar — 15:45
    Dallin H. Oaks — 15:48

    Saturday Afternoon Session
    D. Todd Christofferson — 15:09
    Dean M. Davies — 12:17
    Ulisses Soares — 14:35
    Gerrit W. Gong — 14:46
    Paul B. Pieper — 11:54
    Dieter F. Uchtdorf — 19:38

    General Women’s Session
    Joy D. Jones — 11:53
    Michelle Craig — 11:57
    Cristina B. Franco — 10:57
    Henry B. Eyring — 14:02
    Dallin H. Oaks — 13:14
    Russell M. Nelson — 16:18

    Sunday Morning Session
    M. Russell Ballard — 15:19
    Bonnie H. Cordon — 12:29
    Jeffrey R. Holland — 16:12
    Shayne M. Bowen — 11:50
    Neil L. Andersen — 15:37
    Russell M. Nelson — 15:43

    Sunday Afternoon Session
    Henry B. Eyring — 15:59
    Brian K. Ashton — 10:17
    Robert C. Gay — 10:24
    Matthew L. Carpenter — 10:58
    Dale G. Renlund — 13:48
    Jack N. Gerard — 11:09
    Gary E. Stevenson — 15:10
    Russell M. Nelson — 8:02

    Totals
    29 Males | 393:25 Min
    4 Females | 47:16 Min

    References

    References
    1 October 2018 General Conference – https://www.lds.org/general-conference?lang=eng
  • All They Can Care For

    All They Can Care For

    Excerpt from ‘With Full Purpose of Heart’, by Dallin H. Oaks, Pub. 2002:1

    President Kimball said, “It is an act of extreme selfishness for a married couple to refuse to have children when they are able to do so.” When married couples postpone childbearing until after they have satisfied their mutual goals, the mere passage of time assures that they seriously reduce their potential to participate in furthering our Heavenly Father’s plan for all his spirit children. Faithful Latter-day Saints cannot afford to look upon children as an interference with what the world calls “self-fulfillment.” Our covenants with God and the ultimate purpose of life are tied up in those little ones who require airtime, outlive, and our sacrifice.

    How many children should a couple have? All they can care for! Of Course, to care for children means more than simply giving them life. Children must be loved, nurtured, taught, fed, clothed, housed, and well started in their capacities to be good parents themselves. Exercising faith in God’s promises to bless them when they are keeping his commandments, many LDS parents have large families. Others seek but are not blessed with children or with the number of children they desire. In a matter as intimate as this, we should not judge one another.

    References

  • Excommunication

    Excommunication

    Letter from the Houston Texas South Stake to Sam Young regarding disciplinary action: 1

    Dear Sam,

    This letter is a formal notice that the stake presidency will convene a formal disciplinary council in your behalf, the result of which includes the possibility of excommunication, disfellowshipment, formal probation, or no action. The reason for this council is that you are reported to have acted repeatedly in clear, open and deliberate public opposition to the Church or its leaders. You have, among other things:

    Encouraged others to vote opposed to Church leaders.
    Organized more than one public “action” that expressed opposition to the Church or its leaders.

    We will convene the council at 6pm on Sunday, September 9 at the Lexington Building in the stake offices. If you are not able to attend at this date and time, please let me know as soon as practicable.

    You are invited to attend this disciplinary council to give your response to the above. Although we welcome your attendance, it is not required; you may also submit your response in writing. Whether you attend is of course your choice.

    Disciplinary councils are sacred, confidential, ecclesiastical proceedings. If you do choose to attend your attendance and participation are conditioned upon your agreement to respect the process and abide by the standards governing the proceeding, including the following conditions:

    Everyone who attends the council including you and me, will sign an acknowledgment that the council will be conducted privately and confidentially and will not be recorded in any form. Anyone unwilling to do so will not be allowed to be present at the council. If you decline, you will not be allowed to be present, and any statement on your behalf to the council will have to the submitted in writing.
    You may call witnesses, one at a time, whose testimony is relevant to the issues I have set out above. However, any such witnesses must be identified to me in writing by name, ward and stake, at least three days in advance. You must also provide to me, in advance and in writing, a description of the subject matter on which they will testify and the content of their testimony. In order to offer testimony, witnesses must be members of the Church in good standing. I will abide by these same rules in regards to any witnesses that I may call.
    Any proposed testimony from witnesses must relate to the specific issues described above.
    I anticipate that it will take about 15 minutes for the evidence in support of the above issues to be presented to the council. You will be afforded three times that, or 45 minutes, to give your response.

    As mentioned above, if you choose not to attend the council in person, you may submit a written response that will be read to the council. I will read your statement word-for-word, without any comment from me, for up to 45 minutes.

    I feel inclined to let you know that, if it is your ultimate desire and if you wish to avoid this process entirely you have the option to request that your name be removed from the records of the Church. If you should make such a request, the council will be cancelled, and I will work with you to supply all of the information that you need to bring about that result.

    Sam, I know that Heavenly Father lives and loves you. We are his children. His work and glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. I know that His son Jesus Christ is central to God’s plan to help us return to Him and live with our family forever. The atonement of Jesus Christ is real. He is our Savior and Redeemer. No matter the course you decide to take in this life, and no matter the outcome of this disciplinary council, as His representative in the stake where you reside, I stand ready to help you and your family in any way that I can. I will be here to meet with you and to work with you to help stregnthen your relationship with Heavenly Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. My hope is that you will choose to change your course and to return to the covenant path.

    Sincerely,

    President Houston Texas South Stake

    An August 30, 2018 Newsweek article, ‘MORMON BISHOP SAM YOUNG FACING EXCOMMUNICATION FOR WANTING TO STOP SEXUALLY EXPLICIT INTERVIEWS OF CHILDREN’: 2

    Sam Young, a former Mormon bishop who staged a 23-day hunger strike in protest of the church’s policy to conduct one-on-one interviews with children involving sexually explicit questions, has been warned he faces being excommunicated from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

    Young, founder of Protect LDS Children, has been a constant critic of the church’s practice of allowing Mormon leaders to interview children and youths alone.

    Young believes many of the questions posed in the interviews are inappropriate. It is common for the leaders, often bishops, to ask the children about their sexual experience such as masturbation or viewing pornography in what is known as a “worthiness interview.”

    In July, Young began a 23-day hunger strike in order to raise awareness of the issue and urge the church to scrap the interviews.

    Young has now received a letter from the church delivered by “two long-term friends” which warns he faces possible excommunication during an upcoming disciplinary council meeting.

    “The reason for this council is that you are reported to have acted repeatedly in clear, open and deliberate public opposition to the Church or its leaders,” the letter says. The letter accuses Young of encouraging others to vote in opposition to the church leaders and organizing more than one public “action” to oppose the church.

    “Fast 23 days. Stand up to protect children. Speak out against a dreadful policy. Work to help the healing of countless kids who were severely wounded behind closed doors. Document the horrors. Apologize,” Young wrote in a blog post after receiving the letter. “And what do you get? Excommunication! After all, we are the Mormons. At least we used to be.”

    Young is not required to attend the hearing on September 9 and may submit his response in writing. It is not known what action he is deciding to take.

    Before staging the hunger strike, Young led a march of hundreds to deliver a petition signed by more than 55,000 people demanding an end to the one-on-one interviews.

    In June, the church announced they have updated their guidelines on interviews with children as a result of Young’s national exposure.

    Under a section entitled “Protecting Against Misunderstandings,” the church said children should now ask a parent or another adult to be in an adjoining room, foyer, or hall during the interview. The child can now also ask that another adult be invited to be present during the interview. “Leaders should avoid all circumstances that could be misunderstood,” the guidelines say.

    A list of simplified questions that should be asked to determine the child’s worthiness were also made public, including “do you live the law of chastity?” and “have there been any sins or misdeeds in your life that should have been resolved with priesthood authorities but have not been?”

    “Leaders adapt the discussion to the understanding and questions of the youth,” the guidelines state. “They ensure that discussions about moral cleanliness do not encourage curiosity or experimentation.”

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Excerpt from a 2007 interview by PBS with Dallin H. Oaks, ‘Mormons’: 3

    “It’s wrong to criticize leaders of the church, even if the criticism is true.”

    Excerpt from a February, 1987 Ensign article by Dallin H. Oaks, ‘Criticism’:
    4

    “Criticism is particularly objectionable when it is directed toward Church authorities, general or local. Jude condemns those who ‘speak evil of dignities.’ (Jude 1:8.) Evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed is in a class by itself. It is one thing to depreciate a person who exercises corporate power or even government power. It is quite another thing to criticize or depreciate a person for the performance of an office to which he or she has been called of God. It does not matter that the criticism is true. As Elder George F. Richards, President of the Council of the Twelve, said in a conference address in April 1947,

    “‘When we say anything bad about the leaders of the Church, whether true or false, we tend to impair their influence and their usefulness and are thus working against the Lord and his cause.’ (In Conference Report, Apr. 1947, p. 24.)”

    Excerpt from ‘The Lord’s Way’ by Dallin H. Oaks, Pub. 1991: 5

    “Government or corporate officials, who are directly or indirectly elected or appointed by majority vote, must expect that their performance will be subject to critical and public evaluations by their constituents. That is part of the process of informing those who have the right and power of selection or removal. The same is true of popularly elected officers in professional, community, and other private organizations. I suppose the same is true of religious leaders who are selected by popular vote of members or their representative bodies. Consistent with gospel standards, these evaluations, though critical and public, should be constructive.

    A different principle applies in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, where the selection of leaders if based on revelation, subject to the sustaining vote of members. In our system of church government, evil-speaking or criticism of leaders by members is always negative. As President George F. Richards of the Council of the Twelve said in a conference address in April 1947: “When we say anything bad about the leaders of the Church, whether true or false, we tend to impair their influence and their usefulness and are thus working against the Lord and his cause.” This is why the Holy Ghost will not guide or confirm criticism of the Lord’s anointed or of church leaders, local or general. This is why we are commanded and counseled to refrain from criticism of church leaders. It is for our own spiritual well-being.

    The Lord’s command to avoid criticism, faultfinding, and evil-speaking will never be welcome in a society where controversy is a popular form of entertainment, where opposition is institutionalized, and where personal criticism is commonplace. Some Latter-day Saints do not understand and accept the reality that the institution of “loyal opposition,” which serves a valuable purpose in a democracy governed by the majority, is a contradiction of terms when applied to a theocracy. Some also do not understand that the faultfinding is spiritually destructive to those who engage in it, and that members who engage in personal criticism of church leaders isolate themselves from the Spirit of the Lord. There are ways to differ with the church leaders, but they are the Lord’s ways, not the world’s ways.”

    References

    References
    1 Excommunication Notice, Tocubit Is Invisible’s Cubit – https://invisiblescubit.wordpress.com/2018/08/29/excommunication-notice/
    2 MORMON BISHOP SAM YOUNG FACING EXCOMMUNICATION FOR WANTING TO STOP SEXUALLY EXPLICIT INTERVIEWS OF CHILDREN – https://www.newsweek.com/mormon-bishop-sam-young-excommunication-sexually-explicit-children-interviews-1096856
    3 Dallin H. Oaks as featured on PBS Mormons 2007 – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxyiHLg59ks
    4 Criticism – https://www.lds.org/ensign/1987/02/criticism?lang=eng
    5 ‘The Lord’s Way’ by Dallin H. Oaks, Pub. 1991 – https://deseretbook.com/p/lords-way-dallin-h-oaks-2997?variant_id=108461-paperback
  • Never Had That Experience

    Never Had That Experience

    Excerpt from an address by Dallin H. Oaks at a Multi Stake Youth Fireside in Bellevue, WA – January 23, 2016: 1

    Question (Female youth: 30:17): “My question is what should we pray for to receive this same testimony, if not, conversion that Alma the Younger experienced, for our friends who aren’t of this [church]?”

    Answer (Dallin H. Oaks): “[We] missed the words Alma the Younger, without which I couldn’t understand that very fine question. What should you pray for to have the kind of experience that Alma the younger had? I don’t think your likely to have that kind of experience that Alma the younger had. Remember he had a miraculous experience of an angel, [and] really got hit over the head spiritually. Most of us don’t have that kind of experience. But I interpret your question Heather as being how can we get get the kind of testimony he received. I don’t think we’ll get it like Paul did on the road to, where an angel appeared to him, where Alma the Younger had a startling experience.

    The Lord used a few of those kinds of experiences, and they’re recorded in the scriptures to catch our attention and teach us the answer. But I’ve never had an experience like that and I don’t know anyone among the 1st Presidency or Quorum of the 12 who’ve had that kind of experience. Yet everyone of us knows of a certainty the things that Alma knew. But it’s just that unless the Lord chooses to do it another way, as he sometimes does; for millions and millions of His children the testimony settles upon us gradually. Like so much dust on the windowsill or so much dew on the grass. One day you didn’t have it and another day you did and you don’t know which day it happened. That’s the way I got my testimony. And then I knew it was true when it continued to grow.”

    References

    References
    1 Dallin H. Oaks at a Multi Stake Youth Fireside in Bellevue, WA – January 23, 2016 (audio) – https://soundcloud.com/mormontalk/elder-oaks-youth-fireside-01-23-2016
  • Policy

    Policy

    Interview with Dallin H. Oaks and Neal A. Maxwell regarding the lifting of the race ban: 1

    New Policy Occasions Church Comment

    SALT LAKE CITY (AP) —Here is a partial transcript of an Associated Press interview with Elders Neal A. Maxwell and Dallin H. Oaks of the Mormon Church’s Council of the Twelve Apostles regarding the faith’s policy banning blacks from its priesthood and the reasons the ban was lifted 10 years ago:

    AP: Was the ban on ordaining blacks to the priesthood a matter of policy or doctrine?

    MAXWELL: Well, I don’t know. It certainly was church policy and, obviously, with some considerable commentary from early church leaders about it. It’s difficult commentary from early church leaders about it. It’s difficult for me to go beyond that.

    OAKS: I don’t know that it’s possible to distinguish between policy and doctrine in a church that believes in continuing revelation and sustains its leader as a prophet… I’m not sure I could justify the difference in doctrine and policy in the fact that before 1978 a person could not hold the priesthood
    and after 1978 they could hold the priesthood.

    AP: Did you feel differently about the issue before the revelation was given?

    OAKS: I decided a long time ago, 1961 or 2, that there’s no way to talk about it in terms of doctrine, or policy, practice, procedure. All of those words just fled you to reaffirm your prejudice, whichever it was. The only fair, just way to think about it is to reaffirm your faith in the prophet, and he says you don’t do it now, so you don’t do it now. And if he says tomorrow that you do do it, then you do it.

    MAxWELL: Mine was similar, with the sense of expectation that the direction would come from heaven at some time… As we went to the upper room, we sang a song. I regard myself as a pretty good reader of what is going on (but) I had no inkling of what was going on. And as we knelt down
    to pray, the spirit told me what it was going to be … and after that prayer, President Kimball began the description. I began to weep.

    AP: It appears that prior to 1978, there was a lack of unanimity among the brethren regarding the origin and efficacy of the policy. We understand 10 of the Council of the Twelve voted in 1969 to lift the ban as an administrative procedure, but the plan was overturned by Harold B. Lee.

    MAXWELL: These are things about which I wouldn’t have any knowledge.

    OAKS: That’s a new one to me, too.

    AP: To follow up, just for the sake of argument, in your deliberations on any issue, is unanimity required for a decision?

    MAXWELL: The scripture does lay a requirement of unanimity upon us, and I think that is adhered to, not in a nitpicky way, but it is substantial.

    AP: Does a policy such as this, the priesthood prohibition, require a revelation to change, or can it be done through discourse among the brethren?

    MAXWELL: I think anything as major and significant as this would have required the spiritual endorsement and sanction that was obviously there.

    AP: As much as any doctrine the church has espoused, or controversy the church has been embroiled in, this one seems to stand out. Church members seemed to have less to go on to get a grasp of the issue. Can you address why this was the case, and what can be learned from it?

    OAKS: If you read the scriptures with this question in mind, ‘Why did the Lord command this or why did he command that’ you find that in less than one in a hundred commands was any reason given. It’s not the pattern of the Lord to give reasons. We can put reason to revelation. We can put reasons to commandments. When we do we’re on our own. Some people put reasons to the one we’re talking about here, and they turned out to be spectacularly wrong. There is a lesson in that. The lesson I’ve drawn from that, I decided a long time ago that I had faith in the command and I had no faith in the reasons that had been suggested for it. I decided that 25 years ago, so it was very easy for me when it was changed.

    AP: Are you referring to reasons given even by general authorities?

    OAKS: Sure.

     

    References

  • Obedience

    Obedience

    Interview with Dallin H. Oaks and Neal A. Maxwell regarding the lifting of the race ban: 1

    New Policy Occasions Church Comment

    SALT LAKE CITY (AP) —Here is a partial transcript of an Associated Press interview with Elders Neal A. Maxwell and Dallin H. Oaks of the Mormon Church’s Council of the Twelve Apostles regarding the faith’s policy banning blacks from its priesthood and the reasons the ban was lifted 10 years ago:

    AP: Was the ban on ordaining blacks to the priesthood a matter of policy or doctrine?

    MAXWELL: Well, I don’t know. It certainly was church policy and, obviously, with some considerable commentary from early church leaders about it. It’s difficult commentary from early church leaders about it. It’s difficult for me to go beyond that.

    OAKS: I don’t know that it’s possible to distinguish between policy and doctrine in a church that believes in continuing revelation and sustains its leader as a prophet… I’m not sure I could justify the difference in doctrine and policy in the fact that before 1978 a person could not hold the priesthood
    and after 1978 they could hold the priesthood.

    AP: Did you feel differently about the issue before the revelation was given?

    OAKS: I decided a long time ago, 1961 or 2, that there’s no way to talk about it in terms of doctrine, or policy, practice, procedure. All of those words just fled you to reaffirm your prejudice, whichever it was. The only fair, just way to think about it is to reaffirm your faith in the prophet, and he says you don’t do it now, so you don’t do it now. And if he says tomorrow that you do do it, then you do it.

    MAxWELL: Mine was similar, with the sense of expectation that the direction would come from heaven at some time… As we went to the upper room, we sang a song. I regard myself as a pretty good reader of what is going on (but) I had no inkling of what was going on. And as we knelt down
    to pray, the spirit told me what it was going to be … and after that prayer, President Kimball began the description. I began to weep.

    AP: It appears that prior to 1978, there was a lack of unanimity among the brethren regarding the origin and efficacy of the policy. We understand 10 of the Council of the Twelve voted in 1969 to lift the ban as an administrative procedure, but the plan was overturned by Harold B. Lee.

    MAXWELL: These are things about which I wouldn’t have any knowledge.

    OAKS: That’s a new one to me, too.

    AP: To follow up, just for the sake of argument, in your deliberations on any issue, is unanimity required for a decision?

    MAXWELL: The scripture does lay a requirement of unanimity upon us, and I think that is adhered to, not in a nitpicky way, but it is substantial.

    AP: Does a policy such as this, the priesthood prohibition, require a revelation to change, or can it be done through discourse among the brethren?

    MAXWELL: I think anything as major and significant as this would have required the spiritual endorsement and sanction that was obviously there.

    AP: As much as any doctrine the church has espoused, or controversy the church has been embroiled in, this one seems to stand out. Church members seemed to have less to go on to get a grasp of the issue. Can you address why this was the case, and what can be learned from it?

    OAKS: If you read the scriptures with this question in mind, ‘Why did the Lord command this or why did he command that’ you find that in less than one in a hundred commands was any reason given. It’s not the pattern of the Lord to give reasons. We can put reason to revelation. We can put reasons to commandments. When we do we’re on our own. Some people put reasons to the one we’re talking about here, and they turned out to be spectacularly wrong. There is a lesson in that. The lesson I’ve drawn from that, I decided a long time ago that I had faith in the command and I had no faith in the reasons that had been suggested for it. I decided that 25 years ago, so it was very easy for me when it was changed.

    AP: Are you referring to reasons given even by general authorities?

    OAKS: Sure.

    References

  • Obedience

    Obedience

    Excerpt from an address by Dallin H. Oaks in the ‘Be One’ celebration, June 1, 2018 : 1

    “I observed the pain and frustration experienced by those who suffered these restrictions and those who criticized them and sought for reasons. I studied the reasons then being given and could not feel confirmation of the truth of any of them. As part of my prayerful study, I learned that, in general, the Lord rarely gives reasons for the commandments and directions He gives to His servants. I determined to be loyal to our prophetic leaders and to pray — as promised from the beginning of these restrictions — that the day would come when all would enjoy the blessings of priesthood and temple.”

    Quote attributed to H.L. Mencken

    “Morality is doing what is right regardless of what you are told. Obedience is doing what is told regardless of what is right.”

    References

    References
    1 ‘President Oaks Remarks at Worldwide Priesthood Celebration’, Mormon Newsroom – https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/president-oaks-remarks-worldwide-priesthood-celebration
  • Criticism

    Criticism

    From a Catholic Herald article, ‘Pope Francis: it is not a sin to criticise the Pope’, May 22, 2018: 1

    Pope Francis has told the Italian bishops that it is “not a sin to criticise the Pope here” as he opened their General Assembly.

    The Pope revealed three “worries” during his speech: the decline in vocations, financial scandals, and the reduction and merging of dioceses.

    He encouraged the bishops to “speak openly”, urging them to tell him “all the words, your concerns, criticisms – it is not a sin to criticise the Pope here, yes, not a sin – and inspirations that you carry in your hearts.”

    Pope Francis said he was especially concerned at the “haemorrhaging” of vocations to the priesthood and religious life in Italy, adding that “God only knows” how many seminaries and monasteries will have to close.

    He blamed factors such as demographic changes, scandals in the Church and a “dictatorship of money” that dissuades young people from making life-long commitments.

    Italy is experiencing a “crisis of vocations” in a region that was once the world’s biggest source of missionaries, and was now entering a “vocational sterility”.

    “These are my concerns,” the Pope concluded. “They are points for reflection.”

    Excerpt from a 2007 interview by PBS with Dallin H. Oaks, ‘Mormons’: 2

    “It’s wrong to criticize leaders of the church, even if the criticism is true.”

    Excerpt from a February, 1987 Ensign article by Dallin H. Oaks, ‘Criticism’: 3

    “Criticism is particularly objectionable when it is directed toward Church authorities, general or local. Jude condemns those who ‘speak evil of dignities.’ (Jude 1:8.) Evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed is in a class by itself. It is one thing to depreciate a person who exercises corporate power or even government power. It is quite another thing to criticize or depreciate a person for the performance of an office to which he or she has been called of God. It does not matter that the criticism is true. As Elder George F. Richards, President of the Council of the Twelve, said in a conference address in April 1947,

    “‘When we say anything bad about the leaders of the Church, whether true or false, we tend to impair their influence and their usefulness and are thus working against the Lord and his cause.’ (In Conference Report, Apr. 1947, p. 24.)”

    Excerpt from ‘The Lord’s Way’ by Dallin H. Oaks, Pub. 1991: 4

    “Government or corporate officials, who are directly or indirectly elected or appointed by majority vote, must expect that their performance will be subject to critical and public evaluations by their constituents. That is part of the process of informing those who have the right and power of selection or removal. The same is true of popularly elected officers in professional, community, and other private organizations. I suppose the same is true of religious leaders who are selected by popular vote of members or their representative bodies. Consistent with gospel standards, these evaluations, though critical and public, should be constructive.

    A different principle applies in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, where the selection of leaders if based on revelation, subject to the sustaining vote of members. In our system of church government, evil-speaking or criticism of leaders by members is always negative. As President George F. Richards of the Council of the Twelve said in a conference address in April 1947: “When we say anything bad about the leaders of the Church, whether true or false, we tend to impair their influence and their usefulness and are thus working against the Lord and his cause.” This is why the Holy Ghost will not guide or confirm criticism of the Lord’s anointed or of church leaders, local or general. This is why we are commanded and counseled to refrain from criticism of church leaders. It is for our own spiritual well-being.

    The Lord’s command to avoid criticism, faultfinding, and evil-speaking will never be welcome in a society where controversy is a popular form of entertainment, where opposition is institutionalized, and where personal criticism is commonplace. Some Latter-day Saints do not understand and accept the reality that the institution of “loyal opposition,” which serves a valuable purpose in a democracy governed by the majority, is a contradiction of terms when applied to a theocracy. Some also do not understand that the faultfinding is spiritually destructive to those who engage in it, and that members who engage in personal criticism of church leaders isolate themselves from the Spirit of the Lord. There are ways to differ with the church leaders, but they are the Lord’s ways, not the world’s ways.”

    See also:

    References

    References
    1 Pope Francis: it is not a sin to criticise the Pope – http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2018/05/22/pope-francis-it-is-not-a-sin-to-criticise-the-pope/
    2 Dallin H. Oaks as featured on PBS Mormons 2007 – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxyiHLg59ks
    3 Criticism – https://www.lds.org/ensign/1987/02/criticism?lang=eng
    4 ‘The Lord’s Way’ by Dallin H. Oaks, Pub. 1991 – https://deseretbook.com/p/lords-way-dallin-h-oaks-2997?variant_id=108461-paperback
  • 2018 General Conference

    2018 General Conference

    April 2018 LDS General Conference speaking time (Excluding the Solemn Assembly, Sustaining and Auditing Report): 1

    Saturday Morning Session

    M. Russell Ballard — 14:29
    Brian K. Taylor — 10:24
    Larry J. Echo Hawk — 11:11
    Gary E. Stevenson — 15:07
    Lynn G. Robbins — 10:16
    Neil L. Andersen — 16:05

    Saturday Afternoon Session

    David A. Bednar — 16:01
    Taylor G. Godoy — 10:43
    Bonnie L. Oscarson — 10:07
    Taniela B. Wakolo — 10:34
    Devin G. Durrant — 10:26
    Dale G. Renlund — 14:43

    Priesthood Session

    Douglas D. Holmes — 11:24
    Russell M. Nelson — 3:39
    D. Todd Christofferson — 13:19
    Ronald A. Rasband — 13:25
    Henry B. Eyring — 15:53
    Dallin H. Oaks — 16:01
    Russell M. Nelson — 14:28

    Sunday Morning Session

    Larry Y. Wilson — 11:10
    Reyna Isabel Aburto — 10:19
    Massimo De Feo — 10:15
    Claudio D. Zivic — 10:35
    Henry B. Eyring — 17:02
    Dallin H. Oaks — 17:35
    Russell M. Nelson — 20:27

    Sunday Afternoon Session

    Gerrit W. Gong — 4:56
    Ulisses Soares — 5:24
    Russell M. Nelson — 2:15
    Jeffrey R. Holland — 15:29
    Jean B. Bingham — 13:04
    Dieter F. Uchtdorf — 17:40
    Gérald Caussé — 11:59
    Quentin L. Cook — 15:04

    References

  • No Apologies

    No Apologies

    Excerpt from a January 30, 2015 interview with Dallin H. Oaks and the Salt Lake Tribune, ‘We all can be more civil on LGBT issues, Mormon leader says’:1

    I know that the history of the church is not to seek apologies or to give them,” Oaks said in an interview. “We sometimes look back on issues and say, ‘Maybe that was counterproductive for what we wish to achieve,’ but we look forward and not backward.”

    The church doesn’t “seek apologies,” he said, “and we don’t give them.”

    In a response clarifying the original statement Oaks says in a followup interview: 2

    “I’m not aware that the word ‘apology’ appears anywhere in the scriptures — Bible or BOM. The word ‘apology’ contains a lot of connotations in it, and a lot of significance. We do not seek apologies. When our temple was desecrated in CA, when people were fired and intimidated, when a lot of other coercive measures were used, we sought no apology. That’s what I meant by saying ‘we don’t seek apology.’ We think that the best way to solve these problems is not a formal statement of words that a [sic] apology consists of, but talking about principles and good will among contending viewpoints.”

    References

    References
    1 We all can be more civil on LGBT issues, Mormon leader says – http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=2108746&itype=CMSID
    2 Trib Talk: LDS leaders Oaks, Christofferson will appear on Trib Talk to discuss religious freedom – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIJ6gL_xc-M
  • True Criticism

    True Criticism

    Excerpt from a February, 1987 Ensign article by Dallin H. Oaks, ‘Criticism’: 1

    “Criticism is particularly objectionable when it is directed toward Church authorities, general or local. Jude condemns those who ‘speak evil of dignities.’ (Jude 1:8.) Evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed is in a class by itself. It is one thing to depreciate a person who exercises corporate power or even government power. It is quite another thing to criticize or depreciate a person for the performance of an office to which he or she has been called of God. It does not matter that the criticism is true. As Elder George F. Richards, President of the Council of the Twelve, said in a conference address in April 1947,

    “‘When we say anything bad about the leaders of the Church, whether true or false, we tend to impair their influence and their usefulness and are thus working against the Lord and his cause.’ (In Conference Report, Apr. 1947, p. 24.)”

    References

  • Criticism of Leaders

    Criticism of Leaders

    Excerpt from ‘The Lord’s Way’ by Dallin H. Oaks, Pub. 1991: 1

    “Government or corporate officials, who are directly or indirectly elected or appointed by majority vote, must expect that their performance will be subject to critical and public evaluations by their constituents. That is part of the process of informing those who have the right and power of selection or removal. The same is true of popularly elected officers in professional, community, and other private organizations. I suppose the same is true of religious leaders who are selected by popular vote of members or their representative bodies. Consistent with gospel standards, these evaluations, though critical and public, should be constructive.

    A different principle applies in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, where the selection of leaders if based on revelation, subject to the sustaining vote of members. In our system of church government, evil-speaking or criticism of leaders by members is always negative. As President George F. Richards of the Council of the Twelve said in a conference address in April 1947: “When we say anything bad about the leaders of the Church, whether true or false, we tend to impair their influence and their usefulness and are thus working against the Lord and his cause.” This is why the Holy Ghost will not guide or confirm criticism of the Lord’s anointed or of church leaders, local or general. This is why we are commanded and counseled to refrain from criticism of church leaders. It is for our own spiritual well-being.

    The Lord’s command to avoid criticism, faultfinding, and evil-speaking will never be welcome in a society where controversy is a popular form of entertainment, where opposition is institutionalized, and where personal criticism is commonplace. Some Latter-day Saints do not understand and accept the reality that the institution of “loyal opposition,” which serves a valuable purpose in a democracy governed by the majority, is a contradiction of terms when applied to a theocracy. Some also do not understand that the faultfinding is spiritually destructive to those who engage in it, and that members who engage in personal criticism of church leaders isolate themselves from the Spirit of the Lord. There are ways to differ with the church leaders, but they are the Lord’s ways, not the world’s ways.”

     

    References

    References
    1 ‘The Lord’s Way’ by Dallin H. Oaks, Pub. 1991 – https://deseretbook.com/p/lords-way-dallin-h-oaks-2997?variant_id=108461-paperback
  • Criminal Penalties

    Criminal Penalties

    Excerpt from a lecture by Dallin H. Oaks, “The Popular Myth of the Victimless Crime”, pub. Brigham Young University Press, 1974: 1

    “First, I believe in retaining criminal penalties on sex crimes such as adultery, fornication, prostitution, homosexuality, and other forms of deviate sexual behavior. I concede the abuses and risks of invasion of privacy that are involved in the enforcement of such crimes and therefore concede the need for extraordinary supervision of the enforcement process. I am even willing to accept a strategy of extremely restrained enforcement of private, noncommercial sexual offenses. I favor retaining these criminal penalties primarily because of the standard-setting and teaching function of these laws on sexual morality and their support of society’s exceptional interest in the integrity of the family.”

     

    References

    References
    1 Dallin H. Oaks, “The Popular Myth of the Victimless Crime”, pub. Brigham Young University Press, 1974 – https://archive.org/details/Oaks_Criminalize_Homosexuality
  • Illusory Truth Effect

    Illusory Truth Effect

    Excerpt from Wikipedia, topic: Illusory Truth Effect: 1

    “The illusory truth effect (also known as the truth effect or the reiteration effect) is the tendency to believe information to be correct after repeated exposure. This phenomenon was first identified in a 1977 study at Villanova University and Temple University. When truth is assessed, people rely on whether the information is in line with their understanding or if it feels familiar. The first condition is logical as people compare new information with what they already know to be true. Repetition makes statements easier to process relative to new, unrepeated, statements, leading people believe that the repeated conclusion is more truthful.”

    Excerpt from an address by Boyd K. Packer, seminar for new mission presidents on June 25, 1982: 2

    “It is not unusual to have a missionary say, ‘How can I bear testimony until I get one? How can I testify that God lives, that Jesus is the Christ, and that the gospel is true? If I do not have such a testimony, would that not be dishonest?’ Oh, if I could teach you this one principle: a testimony is to be found in the bearing of it!”

    Excerpt from an April 2008 General Conference address by Dallin H. Oaks: 3

    “Another way to seek a testimony seems astonishing when compared with the methods of obtaining other knowledge. We gain or strengthen a testimony by bearing it. Someone even suggested that some testimonies are better gained on the feet bearing them than on the knees praying for them.”

    Excerpt from a October 2014 General Conference address by Neil L. Andersen: 4

    “A testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith can come differently to each of us. It may come as you kneel in prayer, asking God to confirm that he was a true prophet. It may come as you read the Prophet’s account of the First Vision. A testimony may distill upon your soul as you read the Book of Mormon again and again. It may come as you bear your own testimony of the Prophet or as you stand in the temple and realize that through Joseph Smith the holy sealing power was restored to the earth.22 With faith and real intent, your testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith will strengthen. The constant water balloon volleys from the sidelines may occasionally get you wet, but they need never, never extinguish your burning fire of faith.

    To the youth listening today or reading these words in the days ahead, I give a specific challenge: Gain a personal witness of the Prophet Joseph Smith. Let your voice help fulfill Moroni’s prophetic words to speak good of the Prophet. Here are two ideas: First, find scriptures in the Book of Mormon that you feel and know are absolutely true. Then share them with family and friends in family home evening, seminary, and your Young Men and Young Women classes, acknowledging that Joseph was an instrument in God’s hands. Next, read the testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith in the Pearl of Great Price or in this pamphlet, now in 158 languages. You can find it online at LDS.org or with the missionaries. This is Joseph’s own testimony of what actually occurred. Read it often. Consider recording the testimony of Joseph Smith in your own voice, listening to it regularly, and sharing it with friends. Listening to the Prophet’s testimony in your own voice will help bring the witness you seek.”

    See also:

    References

  • Exclude Homosexuals

    Exclude Homosexuals

    Excerpt from ‘Principles to Govern Possible Public Statement on Legislation Affecting Rights of Homosexuals’ – LDS Apostle Dallin H. Oaks, August 7, 1984: 1

    “It would also be desirable to permit employers to exclude homosexuals from influential positions in media, literature, and entertainment , since those jobs influence the tone and ideals of a society.”

     

    References

    References
    1 Principles to Govern Possible Public Statement on Legislation Affecting Rights of Homosexuals, 1984 –http://www.christopherrandallnicholson.com/uploads/4/9/4/8/49486603/1984_oaks_position_paper.pdf
  • Speaking Time

    Speaking Time

    October 2017 LDS General Conference speaking time. 1

     

    General Women’s Session

    Sharon Eubank – 13:41
    Neill F. Marriott – 13:44
    Joy D. Jones – 12:02
    Dieter F. Uchtdorf – 25:34

    Saturday Morning Session

    Dieter F. Uchtdorf – 20:51
    Bonnie L. Oscarson – 12:08
    Dallin H. Oaks – 16.07
    John C. Pingree – 10:27
    Todd Christofferson – 16:23
    Jeffrey R. Holland – 16:52

    Saturday Afternoon Session

    Gary E. Stevenson – 15:14
    Stephen W. Owen – 10:09
    Quentin L. Cook – 15:26
    Ronald A. Rasband – 14:51
    O. Vincent Haleck – 10:13
    Russell M. Nelson – 15:01

    General Priesthood Session

    Dale G. Renlund – 15:54
    David F. Evans – 9:54
    Richard J. Maynes – 11:31
    Dieter F. Uchtdorf – 22:21
    Henry B. Eyring – 17:25

    Sunday Morning Session

    Jean B. Bingham – 11:25
    Donald L. Hallstrom – 10:10
    David A. Bednar – 17:10
    W. Christopher Waddell – 12:08
    W. Craig Zwick – 12:47
    Henry B. Eyring – 18:52

    Sunday Afternoon Session

    M. Russell Ballard – 13:32
    Tad R. Callister – 10:12
    Joni L. Koch – 9:05
    Stanley G. Ellis – 11:03
    Adilson de Paula Parrella – 9:34
    Ian S. Ardern – 10:18
    José L. Alonso – 9:44
    Neil L. Andersen – 17:29

    Totals
    30 Men: 426:17 min
    5 Women: 63:00 min

     

    References

    References
    1 General Conference October 2017 – https://www.lds.org/general-conference?lang=eng
  • Depopulate a Nation

    Depopulate a Nation

    Excerpt from ‘Principles to Govern Possible Public Statement on Legislation Affecting Rights of Homosexuals’ – LDS Apostle Dallin H. Oaks, August 7, 1984: 1

    One generation of homosexual “marriages” would depopulate a nation, and, if sufficiently widespread, would extinguish its people. Our marriage laws should not abet national suicide.

    ‘Summary
    In summary, and for the reason discussed above, I recommend that the Church:

    (1) Tailor is communications on this subject to take account of the formal difference between the condition or tendency of so-called homosexual persons on the one hand and the homosexual practices on the other.

    (2) Take no position on laws changing the extent to which there are greater criminal penalties for homosexual behavior than for illicit heterosexual behavior.

    (3) Oppose job discrimination laws protecting homosexuals, unless such law contain exceptions permitting employers to exclude homosexuals from employment that involves teaching of or other intimate association with young people.

    (4) Take no position on laws barring other types of discrimination against homosexuals, unless there is a secular basis (persuasive public policy) to justify such discrimination.

    (5) vigorously oppose the legalization of homosexual marriages.’

     

    References

    References
    1 Principles to Govern Possible Public Statement on Legislation Affecting Rights of Homosexuals. – http://www.christopherrandallnicholson.com/uploads/4/9/4/8/49486603/1984_oaks_position_paper.pdf
  • Don’t Expect Us

    Don’t Expect Us

    Excerpt from a 2006 interview with Elder Dallin H. Oaks and Elder Lance B. Wickman: “Same-Gender Attraction”:[footnote]Interview With Elder Dallin H. Oaks and Elder Lance B. Wickman: “Same-Gender Attraction” – LDS Newsroom[/footnote]

    PUBLIC AFFAIRS: At what point does showing that love cross the line into inadvertently endorsing behavior? If the son says, ‘Well, if you love me, can I bring my partner to our home to visit? Can we come for holidays?’ How do you balance that against, for example, concern for other children in the home?’

    ELDER OAKS: That’s a decision that needs to be made individually by the person responsible, calling upon the Lord for inspiration. I can imagine that in most circumstances the parents would say, ‘Please don’t do that. Don’t put us into that position.’ Surely if there are children in the home who would be influenced by this example, the answer would likely be that. There would also be other factors that would make that the likely answer. I can also imagine some circumstances in which it might be possible to say, ‘Yes, come, but don’t expect to stay overnight. Don’t expect to be a lengthy house guest. Don’t expect us to take you out and introduce you to our friends, or to deal with you in a public situation that would imply our approval of your “partnership.”



    Crash Course:

    Timeline of Mormon Thinking About Homosexuality – Rational Faiths
    Interview With Elder Dallin H. Oaks and Elder Lance B. Wickman: “Same-Gender Attraction” – LDS Newsroom

  • Charity

    Charity

    It is estimated the LDS church pulls in between 5 billion dollars annually in tithing revenue alone, sans additional for-profit enterprises. [footnote]Mormons Inc. – Time Magazine [/footnote]

    From a Dallin Oak (LDS Apostle) 2016 address on religious freedom at the University of Oxford:[footnote]Transcript: Elder Dallin H. Oaks at University of Oxford [/footnote]

    “Care for the poor and needy is not optional or incidental in our Church. We do this worldwide. For example, in the year 2015 we had 177 emergency response projects in 56 countries. In addition, we had hundreds of projects that impacted more than a million people in seven other categories of assistance, such as clean water, immunization, and vision care. For more than 30 years the magnitude of these efforts has averaged about 40 million dollars a year.”

    The Deseret Morning News LDS Church Almanac gives information on historical membership records of the LDS church. The church’s reported membership as of December 31, 2015 was 15,634,199.[footnote]2015 Statistical Report for April 2016 General Conference [/footnote] The growth of 1.7% in 2015 is the lowest percentage growth since 1937.[footnote]LDS Church Growth Slows to Its Lowest Level Since 1937, But Here’s the Good News in That [/footnote]

    Though the LDS church has a robust welfare program, funded through fast offerings, the percentage of tithing funds that go towards external humanitarian causes is fairly low considerings it substantial resources. Even adjusting the estimated numbers to lean more conservative, the per-member donation would still fall under $10 annually.

    Contrast this with the recent estimated $2 billion cost of the City Creek mega-mall in downtown Salt Lake City. [footnote]The money behind the mormon message – Salt Lake Tribune [/footnote]

    Since 1959 the LDS church has not publicly disclosed its financial statements… even to its tithe payers.

     


    Crash Course:

    How the Mormons Make Money – Bloomberg

    LDS Church Finances – Wikipedia

    Mormon Leaks