October 2019 General Conference

[BigFatMeanie]

I think I'm too honest in the TR interview. When asked about the WOW - said yes I keep it - but I have lust in my heart for coffee, and always walk down the coffee aisle at the grocery store wistfully taking in the aroma.

I like to burden my leaders with stupid shit - to make sure I'm never called beyond the clerk level.

Ooh, gross. Not me. The smell of coffee is vile. And the smell of coffee breath is even worse than vile, whatever that is. Coffee-flavored candy, mocha ice cream, tiramisu, etc. - all taste foul to me.

I might have lust in my heart for 'Napper-approved boobs, but definitely not for coffee.

[clackamascoug]

I think I'm too honest in the TR interview. When asked about the WOW - said yes I keep it - but I have lust in my heart for coffee, and always walk down the coffee aisle at the grocery store wistfully taking in the aroma.

I like to burden my leaders with stupid shit - to make sure I'm never called beyond the clerk level.

[Moliere]

Nice for the Church to make sure that important doctrinal clarification is right there on archive.sltrib.com for anybody to read and reference if they need help understanding the new TR questions.

POTD!

[smokymountainrain]

So are you saying if the Bish and SP asks for anything more that "yes or no" for an answer you can tell them to F off? Good to know.

as JL said, if you answer yes or no, they aren't going to probe further. but for the sake of argument, lets say they do probe further - you just reiterate your yes or no answer.

SP: do you keep the WoW? UT: yes. SP: i mean, do you drink coffee? UT: i keep the word of wisdom.

or you could tell him to eff off.

if you choose the latter option, please return and report.

[Jeff Lebowski]

So are you saying if the Bish and SP asks for anything more that "yes or no" for an answer you can tell them to F off? Good to know.

Bishops and SP's are specifically trained to ask the questions exactly as written and to not probe further.

[Uncle Ted]

I don't get your point. It is a yes/no question. Always has been.

So are you saying if the Bish and SP asks for anything more that "yes or no" for an answer you can tell them to F off? Good to know.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I’m not sure any consistent “understanding” of the WoW exists. For example, this was posted in the comment section of this blog concerning eating meat sparingly and only in times of need:


https://askgramps.org/when-did-the-w...a-commandment/

Then there is the endless debate over hot drinks, mild drinks (including ones that you make yourself), etc. Maybe the best answer to this TR question is "Yes, I understand that the WoW is not a commandment like it says in 89:2" rather than trying to apply mental gymnastics to it.

I don't get your point. It is a yes/no question. Always has been.

[Uncle Ted]

I’m not sure any consistent “understanding” of the WoW exists. For example, this was posted in the comment section of this blog concerning eating meat sparingly and only in times of need:

Sparingly means without waste NOT very little.


ALL scriptures regarding the use of meat say that we are to eat meat in abundance and that it is for our use. Why members of the church insist on taking this one verse in the D&C and applying a totally different meaning that supersedes all other scriptures is beyond my understanding.
The Lord wants us to use the animal in a prudent way. Anyone that advocates NOT to eat meat is NOT of God.

https://askgramps.org/when-did-the-w...a-commandment/

Then there is the endless debate over hot drinks, mild drinks (including ones that you make yourself), etc. Maybe the best answer to this TR question is "Yes, I understand that the WoW is not a commandment like it says in 89:2" rather than trying to apply mental gymnastics to it.

[Green Monstah]

Good grief we can’t have handbooks now?

New bishop: “Ok, how do I do this?”

SP: “Beats me. Just make it up as you go I guess.”

What could possibly go wrong?

That’s not exactly my point. Do you not recognize the tension?

[CardiacCoug]

I think people tend to overthink this issue when it just takes a little common sense. There is a difference between disagreeing and being disloyal. There is no problem with disagreeing with the church as long as that disagreement is done in a spirit of love and unity. Openly fighting against the church in a way that diminishes faith and leads people away is being disloyal. Stay within those parameters and don't bother your local leaders with your anxiety - plan your yes/no answers before the interview. And if you feel like you need to discuss it, share your disagreements in a spirit of love and humility and you will not have a problem 99.9% of the time.

Yes I agree with this of course. Either don’t go to the TR interview or give the right answers. The TR isn’t a chance to debate doctrinal points with your leaders — they have enough shit to deal with.

Some however think the TR questions pretty much mean that everybody has to agree on everything (church-related).

[Jeff Lebowski]

If you're saying that there's no part of the handbook that is utilized to govern the general populace of the Church, then I disagree with your point. Simply because the handbook is drafted to guide local leadership does not mean that its contents do not affect the ways in which rank-and-file members interact with and experience the Church.

Good grief we can’t have handbooks now?

New bishop: “Ok, how do I do this?”

SP: “Beats me. Just make it up as you go I guess.”

What could possibly go wrong?

[Green Monstah]

If the handbooks were meant to govern the conduct of general populace of the Church, your point would be more compelling.

If you're saying that there's no part of the handbook that is utilized to govern the general populace of the Church, then I disagree with your point. Simply because the handbook is drafted to guide local leadership does not mean that its contents do not affect the ways in which rank-and-file members interact with and experience the Church.

[Green Monstah]

CB.

Haha. You may be the only one. 11 thumbs down?!

[falafel]

What other platform??

CB.

[All-American]

Yeah, it probably is. But doesn't anyone else struggle with the "teach them the principles and let them govern themselves" approach and the presence of two handbooks written by Kirton McConkie attorneys?*

In practice, I've found almost all church leaders to be kind, practical people. But I do view this revision in particular as a way to separate/punish/marginalize those that don't fall in line. Maybe it's just my cynicism, but I'm struggling to see a plausible alternative.

*This is a joke. But I suspect it's true, at least in part.

If the handbooks were meant to govern the conduct of general populace of the Church, your point would be more compelling.