The April 2018 General Conference just closed. It was a monumental one, with many interesting features and announcements. From the Solemn Assembly that it led off with in which all church members, quorum by quorum and group by group had the chance to sustain Russell M. Nelson as the new prophet (and including a wonderful change in the order in which the groups sustained him), to the the calling of two new apostles that each represented a shift in the Quorum of the Twelve toward greater ethnic diversity, 
to the announcement of major changes in two long-standing practices (how Melchizedek Priesthood quorums meet, and to Visiting and Home Teaching), this was an action-packed and fascinating conference.
In this episode, Matt Jones and Sara Lake join Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon in offering their reactions to all that took place, as well as presenting ideas they have heard from others. It is a terrific, lively, spirit- and humor-filled conversation.
Listen in! Then please share your reactions to conference and/or this conversation in the comments section below!
_____
Links:
To Pre-Register for the April 2018 Mormon Matters Workshop, “Mapping the Wilderness: Support and Inspiration for Your Faith Journey” (Co-lead by Dan Wotherspoon and Jana Spangler, with Special Guest Phil McLemore), click below.
Be sure to choose the 1-person or 2-person option, then click the button. You will be able to pay through PayPal or via credit/debit card (which you can select below the PayPal login).
________
To Register for the 12-14 April Parenting Retreat (sponsored by the Lower Lights Sangha), featuring Terri O’Fallon and Kim Barta, click here.
________
The Church’s announcements about the new programs for Melchizedek Priesthood and Visiting Teaching becoming “Ministering”
(The First Presidency letter that will be read in sacrament meetings plus a seven-page list with more explicit instructions can only be accessed if you received the email from the church)
News story and interview with the woman who interrupted conference by yelling “Stop protecting Sexual Predators!”
“In an Overture to #MeToo, Mormon Apostle Condemns Nonconsensual Immorality,” Salt Lake Tribune, 1 April 2018
Emily Jensen, “Mormon Leader’s Comments About ‘Nonconsensual Immorality’ Draw Fire,” Flunking Sainthood blog, 3 April 2018
Comments 9
Thanks for a excellent podcast! Lots of great changes taking place and like the participants, I’m very excited. On a totally unrelated note, I would love to get other people’s reaction to Elder Cook’s comment that guidance to senior Church leaders “comes from the Spirit and sometimes directly from the Savior.” I have heard and read a lot, but I do not recall a single instance where an apostle in the Church has made this claim since the time of Joseph Smith. There have been many statements implying that visitations from Christ occur but always worded (it would seem deliberately) in such a way that you can’t be sure what was actually said. I’m a social and cultural Mormon who doubts just about every spiritual or religious claim the Church makes, but I’ve always felt that the leaders of the Church make their claims honestly/sincerely. I’ve long suspected that the “special” witness they’ve received is qualitatively not much different from those I’ve received in the past except for the fact that they still trust their feelings wholeheartedly, but Elder Cook’s statement would seem to contradict that.
Is there any way to understand his statement other than literally? If such visitations occur, why on earth is this not more clearly stated, even if the details of the encounter are private? (Even in this talk, the statement was easy to overlook.) If recipients of such visitations are commanded not to speak of the experience, why did this commandment not apply during the other 9.1 out of 10 dispensations? And why now did Elder Cook feel he could speak of it? I know there aren’t definitive answers to these questions, but as I said before, I believe Elder Cook made this statement sincerely, but I also have trouble believing what he said, and I’m just not sure what to make of it. Thanks for any thoughts!
I think that phrase “directly from Jesus Christ” still does not have to mean a literal, physical appearance. I have used that wording before to describe a communication that I deemed to be from Jesus Christ. It called it powerful and “direct.” I think we can add that to the list of references to the leaders’ communication with the spirit that still leave us questioning whether or not it was literal and physical.
Author
Great question, Michael! Thanks for querying about it.
I agree with Joy that there is wiggle room here for his claim, that it is likely referring to particularly powerful impressions. When your framework is “this is Christ’s church,” then I can see how that is completely how he might experience it. It wouldn’t have to be a visitation/vision to use that language (but I agree with you that it fuels the fire some members have for wanting assurances that they are “special” witnesses when leaders say something similar.)
Long ago in my religious studies and philosophy of religion training, I came to agree with many scholars that NO spiritual/mystical experience is unmediated. Always our minds, framings, expectations, language, hopes, autobiography, etc. are co-contributors to what comes through to us. It is the case with us, and with “special witnesses.” It doesn’t mean someone is dissembling when they claim a visitation or something as pure revelation. For me, they simply experienced a strong message from God/Spirit/Universe that came through those symbols and mythic structures, and that in telling of them, they cannot help but also express something about them in that same framing.
Thanks for the quick podcast so soon after conference! The announcements were heartening and I especially enjoyed the conversation and guests. I would love to visit Matt’s Bothell Ward and Sara’s ideas and laugh were so delightful! You have such great friends, Dan.
Author
I’m definitely blessed in the friends department! Agree on Sara’s laugh and insights! Let’s talk about a run up to Washington to visit Matt and his ward soon!
I really enjoyed hearing your guest’s perspectives on this most recent general conference. The changes brought relief to me regarding home teaching. A lot of cultural baggage has developed around home teaching in priesthood quorums. I thought of a frequent complaint I’ve heard over the years that visiting teaching “visits” were more loosely defined whereas the brethren had to make formal visits for it to be counted. The sisters have been doing visits more in line with the spirit of these recent changes I believe. Anyway, not having to make monthly reports about “visits” is an improvement. I am somewhat hardened against home teaching because it has been used to instill a lot of guilt over the years. The guilt I’ve permitted myself to feel at church doesn’t help my desire to attend. I hope these changes will help make the church more nurturing. It will be a relief to not be pressured to accept a last minute visit so someone can report they did their home teaching. I’m also happy about the combination of priesthood quorums so we can be more unified and supportive of each other. Thank you again for the discussion. Best 2U.
Author
Nathan, you speak for MANY in your comments above. Thank you for giving voice to those issues about how home teaching has long carried baggage and how it has been tracked having many guilt-inducing pressures. With you, hoping for the best with this new approach!
Stake president has called me for an interview in the Temple this Saturday.
I wonder what for.
Author
What did it turn out to be, David? Willing to report here?