Here I am once again as I promised, to consider the options the Church has in terms of handling President Monson's absence from General Conference. There are a few things to consider:
1. Temple announcements: In view of Elder Wilson's statement that there are around 80 potential temple sites that could have an official announcement during the next 15 years, the Church would need to add 5 or 6 new temples every year, which works out to around 3 per General Conference. As has been the case previously, I imagine that there will be some General Conferences in which no new temples are announced. After all, the last 12 temples have been announced during the April General Conference. That said, it would make sense if the Church spread out these temple announcements, so it seems logical to assume that we could have at least 2 or 3 announced in each General Conference, and have a few additional new temples announced in between each April & October.
2. What might be done with the time that President Monson would have taken to speak to us? I see three or four options, as follows:
First, one of President Monson's children could, at his request and with his consent, read a previously prepared message (if that happens, it will most likely be done by his oldest son Thomas L. Monson, but I'm sure an equal case could be made for his daughter Ann M. Dibb or his son Clark S. Monson). President Monson could also have his personal secretary read a prepared message. I'm not sure how likely that might be to happen.
Another option, as has been done in the past, is for one or both of the prophet's counselors to present messages in his behalf, with his advice and consent, using either the words President Monson has spoken previously, or providing an update on how he's doing and to testify that the Lord is at the helm of His work.
The final option that I find to be likely is one I favor the most above any of the others presented above. That would be to have President Nelson speak twice in the next General Conference. That could be done by removing President Monson from the speaking list of the Saturday Priesthood and Sunday Morning Sessions, having the Priesthood Session begin with President Uchtdorf's address, then the member of the Quorum of the Twelve & Presidency of the Seventy, adding a General Authority Seventy (whom I would transfer from the Sunday Morning Session) and having President Eyring conclude the meeting.
Then, with the Sunday Morning Session, President Eyring would be the first speaker. Elder Hales, if he speaks in that session, would be next, followed by the second speaker from the Presidency of the Seventy and either Sister Marriott or Sister Bingham (whichever did not speak during the Saturday Morning Session), then having the second apostle (I am predicting Elder Stevenson), a General Authority Seventy, and then the session would conclude with President Nelson's second address.
I am convinced that there are other things the Church can and probably might do. I have presented these as the most likely options, but they are not by any means the only options, and they may not even be the best options. Whatever happens, I know that the Lord will continue to govern how and in what manner the events of the General Conferences of His Church are conducted. For myself, I will be no less surprised if and when I find out that I am wrong in things I have thought and asserted than I will be profoundly grateful for anything I have correctly predicted.
I will be posting again in a moment with a completely updated copy of my General Conference Predictions for October 2017. For now, thank you for the privilege of your time. Any and all comments are welcome and appreciated. Until that next post, I wish you all the best.
On this blog, I, James Stokes, share insights and analysis covering the latest news and developments reported about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. My specific emphasis and focus is on the ministry of our current apostles, General Conference, and up-to-date temple information. This site is neither officially owned, operated, or endorsed by the Church, and I, as the autthor thereof, am solely responsible for this content.
Search This Blog
Wednesday, September 20, 2017
Considering the Church's options for the October General Conference
I have had a lifelong love for Church history, which has extended to ongoing reports of the ministry of our apostles and prophets, General Conference, and all temple developments. This blog enables me to share that love with all who read my thoughts on these developments, which are sometimes reported multiple times per day as needed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
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.