Stokes Sounds Off: Revised Predictions for the October 2018 General Conference: Part One--Preliminary Thoughts

Search This Blog

Leaderboard

Sunday, September 16, 2018

Revised Predictions for the October 2018 General Conference: Part One--Preliminary Thoughts


Hello again, everyone! Although I will be posting with a report on President Nelson's remarks to the Saints in Vancouver British Columbia as soon as that comes in (which may not be until sometime tomorrow), I wanted to post the fully-revised predictions I have put together for the October 2018 General Conference. They include revised thoughts about the speaking order, an updated version of the potential changes in Church leadership, and a revised list of temple prospects that has been expanded and consolidated a few different ways.

These predictions are based on extensive research of patterns, a consideration of what is currently known, and projections about what could potentially occur. Some may consider these predictions to be speculative in nature, but these are far more than wild guesses. In previous General Conferences, I have noted prevailing patterns and applied those to data I have assembled on each aspect of those predictions.

The biggest unknowns for this General Conference are how having the Women's Session in the spot that has traditionally featured the Priesthood Session might affect the typical speaking patterns, the extent to which previous patterns of releasing general authorities and area seventies might hold true this go-round, whether or not any major announcements will alter typical patterns as was true last conference, and if and how the backlog of 19 announced temples which have not had a groundbreaking might impact how soon, in what manner, and to what extent President Nelson's temple--building plans might be revealed.

There are a few definitive certainties: Barring anything unexpected, President Nelson will open and close the conference, his counselors will almost certainly speak at the conclusion of the Saturday Morning Session and to open the Sunday Morning Session, at least one member of the First Presidency will speak during the Women's Session (regardless of who else might do so), all members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles should speak, and the Sustaining of Church Officers will almost certainly occur in its' traditional spot at the beginning of the Saturday Afternoon Session.

Also, although there have been a few exceptions in recent years, the Church has generally released General Authority Seventies in the October General Conference of the year of their 70th birthdays. Additionally, given that Brook P. Hales, Secretary to the First Presidency, was called as a General Authority Seventy in May, his call should be ratified by sustaining vote during the traditional sustaining.

4 current Area Seventies have been serving since July as mission presidents for the Church, while 6 others have been called to serve as temple presidents starting in November, and there are 5 or 6 others who have served for 7 years or more who may also be released. And if a large-scale temple plan is unfurled (which certainly appears to be more likely than not), there are a minimum of 20 locations (but certainly more) that I could see being announced during General Conference.

There is also a possibility that, in a similar manner to the announcement last conference that Melchizedek Priesthood Quorums would be restructured, the Church's 6 area seventies Quorums could also be significantly restructured and the seventies quorums as they now stand could be divided further. I say that because, if I have the distribution of the 5th and 6th Quorums correct on my personal list, then those two Quorums, along with the 3rd and 4th, are each within 20 members or less of a total of 70. And with the Church being more global, it might make more logistical sense for Quorum meetings if the geographical distribution of those Quorums was streamlined.

Right now, those area seventies residing in Europe and Africa comprise the 3rd Quorum of the Seventy. Those area seventies serving in Latin America comprise the 4th and 7th Quorums. The North American area seventies comprise the membership of the 5th and 6th Quorums. And those area seventies currently serving in Asia, the Philippines, and the Pacific Islands comprise the 8th Quorum.

As I noted previously, the area seventies serving in Utah (with confirmation having been provided that the state is now a single area rather than 3 separate ones) comprise the bulk of the membership of the 5th Quorum, regardless of whichever other areas fall under that Quorum. There has also been a substantial increase in the number of area seventies serving in Africa and through South America. So I can definitely see why the Church might consider creating another Quorum or two for the area seventies of the Church.

I have opened up a new thread on the Church growth reddit to more fully discuss that prospect, so I would welcome any input on that through either the reddit or the comments on this blog. I had intended to conclude this post with the fully-revised predictions I have put together for the upcoming General Conference, but this post has become a little lengthier than I intended, so I will do so in a follow-up to this post in a few minutes.

Therefore, that does it for this post. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly-added content, please feel free to subscribe. Until my next post, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do.

3 comments:

  1. I predict many new LDS missions to be announced (maybe 70 or more), mostly in the US. Special Service theme.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hello, Bryce! Thank you for taking time to comment. Generally, the assignments of new mission presidents and any changes in missions have traditionally been announced after the first of the year (this year, those new adjustments were announced in February), and new mission presidents start serving in July every year, so unless something is occurring about which none of us are aware, it does not seem likely that the Church will deviate from that pattern. I would therefore anticipate that any changes in missions will not be announced until sometime early next year.

    Additionally, the theory that a mass number of new missions could be announced (particularly in the United States) may be missing the mark. The United States (aside from the region defined as the "Mormon corridor") has been in a state of stagnated growth for the last several years (as verified by Matthew Martinich, who authors the Church Growth Blog). And given that 8 of the 19 missions consolidated earlier this year were in the United States, I don't see why so many are predicting new missions. Do you have any reason for that prediction, or is it just a hope on your part? If you have heard anything that may justify your opinion, I'd love to hear more on that. In the meantime, the Church emphasized serving in a higher and holier way when home and visiting teaching were replaced with ministering last April, but at least two of the talks in every General Conference recently have touched on the subject of service, so it wouldn't surprise me if a service theme continued to be emphasized. Again, please let me know why you are predicting many new missions will be announced. I would love to hear more on that. In the meantime, thank you for taking time to comment, Bryce!

    ReplyDelete
  3. It looks like I may owe you, Bryce, and others who have commented on the question of some development in the missionary work of the Church an apology if I was overly dismissive. A comment on the LDS Church Growth Blog earlier today noted that senior service missionaries had been advised of something big coming down the pike for this next General Conference. What exactly that is, and the extent to which it goes, is unknown, but it appears that there are a great many reasons to look forward to the upcoming General Conference, and definitively more of those reasons than I may have originally thought possible, practical, or feasible. We will have to wait for the next two weeks and see what exactly occurs, but nothing may be off the table.

    I say that because Sister Nelson has reported that her husband continues to be woken up at all hours of the night with impressions he has then written down about what the Lord wants done, and these occurrences have only become more frequently and longer in duration since he became President of the Church 8 months ago. With that in mind, we should all batten down the hatches. General Conference last April was historic, to be sure. But if the words of Church leaders are to be taken at face value, the general consensus is "You ain't seen nothing yet!" Whatever happens will be interesting to see. And I will be sure to carry full reports of it all here on this blog either way. Thanks again to you, Bryce, and to all of you for your readership and ongoing contributions to dialogue relating those things I have felt impressed to "sound off" about. I appreciate you all!

    ReplyDelete

In addition to my life-long love for the subjects which I cover in the posts of this blog, I have long held the belief that we can disagree without becoming disagreeable. Differences of opinion are natural, while being disagreeable in expressing those differences is not. And in that sense, I have no desire to close the door on anyone who earnestly desires to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on subjects covered in the posts on this blog.

At the same time, however, I recognize that we live in a time when incivility, discourtesy, unkindness, and even cyber-bullying has regrettably become part of online interactions. With that in mind, while anyone who wishes can comment on anything if they choose to do so, I hereby reserve the right to immediately delete any comments which are critical, unkind, lack civility, or promote prodcuts, services, and values contrary to either the Church, or to the rules of online etiquette.

I'd also like to remind all who comment here that I try to respond personally to each individual comment as I feel is appropriate. Such replies are not meant to end the conversation, but to acknowledge earnest feedback as it is submitted.

And in order to better preserve the spirit and pure intentions for which this blog was established, I also hereby request that anyone not commenting with a regular user name (particularly those whose comments appear under the "Unknown" or "Anonymous" monikers, give the rest of us a name to work with in addressing any replies. If such individuals do not wish to disclose their actual given names, a pseudonym or nickname would suffice.

Any comments made by individuals who opt to not give a name by which they can ber identified may, depending on the substance and tone of such comments, be subject to deletion as well. I would respectfully ask that all of us do all we can to keep the dialogue positive, polite, and without malice or ill-will. May the Lord bless us all in our discussion of these important matters.