Once or twice in a generation we get a General Conference like the one in two weeks: where a newly elevated President of the Church first addresses the full membership of the Church in General Conference. The expectations are even higher when the new President’s predecessor had been in mental and/or physical decline for some time. I have heard a variety of online rumors that “something big” is coming at Conference, which often does not come to pass in the event, but does sort of raise the ante. Are you excited for what we might hear from the new First Presidency? Are you anxious or worried about what might be said or presented? I’m sort of both. I’ll offer my thoughts in the classic good, bad, and ugly format. You can share your thoughts in the comments.
The Good
It will be good to hear a strong and confident President’s voice. It will be good to hear from ex-President Uchtdorf as he shoulders new responsibilities for rewriting the curriculum materials of the Church (or whatever he plans to do with it). No Women’s Conference this time: remember that General (male) Priesthood meeting will be a Saturday evening session every April and General (female) Women’s Conference will be a Saturday evening session every October. That seems like a very reasonable change. It also definitively resolves the dispute from a few years back about whether Women’s Conference held the week before was technically part of General Conference or not.
The Bad
I’m anxious about what exactly President Nelson is going to say and how he is going to say it. Sometimes the mantle of leadership, of actually running the whole show, moves a leader to adopt a kinder and gentler approach. That would be nice. But you never really know what is coming. If the “big change” is relaxing the rules for home teaching visits or even collapsing home and visiting teaching into some hybrid love your neighbor program, fine. If he just tells everyone to read the Book of Mormon and keep the sabbath day holy, fine. Don’t forget there are a couple of openings in the Twelve to be filled. If a non-white or non-Anglo fills one of the those spots, that would be a real step forward.
The Ugly
The November Policy and the Family Proclamation are sort of the elephants in the room here. I know there are rumors, but I can’t see the Proclamation or the Policy being proposed for canonization. That would push thousands of members out the door for no particular benefit, as most members already treat them as revelation. That action would create controversy, and what a new President wants at his first Conference is unity, not division. On the other hand, I can’t see them publicly stepping back from the Policy or the Proclamation. That runs counter to everything we have heard from Pres. Nelson and Pres. Oaks the last few years. So maybe they will simply sidestep the whole issue this time around.
But they’ll have to address it sooner or later. It’s like a self-inflicted wound that refuses to heal, damaging missionary efforts in the West (US, Canada, Europe), alienating thousands of members, and hurting tithing receipts (a measurable effect that certainly gets the attention of senior leaders). Interestingly, local leaders by and large have found ways to avoid taking actions based on a straightforward application of the Policy. That’s the only conclusion I can draw in the complete absence of media or social media reports of this or that gay couple being excommunicated or this or that child denied LDS baptism under the terms of the Policy. Given the visibility of the issue, if such things were happening, they would certainly be reported. If the Policy is hurting the Church’s public image and local leaders aren’t applying it anyway, why keep it? In the long run, they’ll either have to double down on it (force local leaders to apply the Policy) or quietly shelve it. But I suspect not at this Conference.
So, wild speculation aside, what are your hopes or fears about this upcoming Conference?

I tend to believe the online rumors about changes coming to the home teaching program because of the announcement in the April Ensign that they are discontinuing the First Presidency Message. For me the good about Conference is that it’s a time my family gets together, I like the music and I usually have 2-3 talks I enjoy and find uplifting. The bad is that I usually have some talks that make me angry. My fear is that the tone of the conference will be focused on conditional love and obligation to fulfill our covenant’s contractual obligations or be at risk of being in material breach and subject to the penalties outlined in the terms and conditions. My GC pet peeve is when Seventies or people in an auxiliary presidency use personal examples of apostles from previous talks that were usually less than 5 years ago. It seems like such a cop out. You got the chance to speak in General Conference, why don’t you use your own stories?
I am hopeful that there will be a strong pro immigration and multicultural message to counter the xenophobia currently infesting the Republican party. I worry about anti-science and anti- intellectual dog whistling.
Dave – very good overview of issues and concerns. I can’t say I am neither all that excited nor anxious, but I am curious both on the tone and the new folks being brought into the Q12.
Excited or Anxious?
meh.
Also meh.
If I have any concerns, it’s that the two new Apostles will both be white men from Utah. And even then it’ll be more of a major disappointment than a concern.
Don’t care………
I actually stopped watching many years ago. I got tired of being reduced to tears and it finally dawned on me “the Lord doesn’t want you to feel like this,”
I am looking forward to sustaining President Nelson, President Oaks and President Eyring. I have worked to receive my own confirmation of their calls. Knowing myself, there will be changes that will make me sad, like the elimination of the First Presidency message from the Ensign, but feeling sad is not a failure to sustain; it is just mourning a personal loss. It has been a month that has left me spiritually weary, so I am looking forward to the opportunity to be immersed in the Spirit for 2 days. That is how Conference feels for me.
Since l’ll be in town I will go to the Sat afternoon session, the first time in years actually watching conference. It will be cool – I‘m just there for the vibe, but would‘t mind some controversial talks or good jokes just the same.
Some of us are hoping that our children will be able to remain in the Church, and hoping that conference won’t give them one more reason to give up on it, but I guess it’s par for the course that someone like Eugene finds “controversial” talks amusing.
I used to love conference, then I was ambivalent, then I dreaded it. Now I plan to ignore it as much as possible, other than the fact that I have a passing interest in the possible home teaching change.
With regard to this: “Interestingly, local leaders by and large have found ways to avoid taking actions based on a straightforward application of the Policy. ”
I have to disagree, strongly disagree, maybe not with the exact wording, but with the implication of this statement. Of the few families I know affected by this policy, I believe 100% are completely inactive now, if they are even still members. They didn’t have interest in seeing their children shunned or treated differently than the rest. These are families where the parents have joint custody, and their kids live part time with the gay parent. The straight parents have all quit. Leaders who choose to do nothing about this policy are still chasing people out of the church.
Not sure. When Ezra T. Benson became President, they held an open Solemn Assembly as part of General Conference for the first time. But, in the Conference after the June 1978 Priesthood Revelation, virtually nothing was said about that in the talks.
There will be nothing radical. That’s not how the church works. We are not overtly charismatic or visionary. Controversial maybe but that is usually in the eye of the beholder. GC will be the same it has been for the last 20 years and will be the same in the next 20
I’m going to change my answer. I just read about the retired MTC president talking on tape about molesting sister missionaries. I’m thinking that I am going to be disappointed in conference. Because the #MormonMeToo won’t be mentioned. Nor will domestic abuse or sexual harassment at all. And I feel this huge need for our leaders to be out in front on this one, to be carrying the swords and shields and going on the attack against the predators that hurt women (or female predators that hurt men, I’m not picky) in our church. This is such a huge issue. For those who have been victimized, it is one of the guiding issues of their lives. And yet it won’t be mentioned…
I’m curious about the two new apostles, and whether the rumors of big changes will amount to anything. I suspect most of the talks will be fairly typical (appealing to different members depending on the speaker). I doubt the #MormonMeToo will be mentioned, too controversial and late in the game, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there was at least one speaker who takes on the sensitive topic of abuse of women and children. Kind of like Elder Kearon’s talk on refugees, hitting a potential political minefield with deftness and making it palatable and inspirational to all members. Or Rosemary Wixom’s talk on a young mom losing her testimony without the normal scapegoats of sin or laziness.
I’m hoping for a full repudiation of Republican politics. I know—IT. WILL. NEVER. HAPPEN.
I won’t be terribly surprised if the new Apostles are from Utah (again), but I will be disappointed.
I would very much like to hear the Brethren finally decry gun violence directly, and gently invite Church members everywhere to advocate for better gun control legislation, and additionally ask American members to give up their military-style assault rifles and stop amassing private arsenals as part of their food storage–or generally not be driven by fear and paranoia in their decision to purchase firearms. I’m not asking them to place constraints on legal gun ownership for hunting/sporting purposes, nor on anyone who bears arms professionally (police/military), but to gently remind the membership of the Church that Jesus Christ would expect us to be more considerate of the public safety of our society. I would like to think this would especially be of concern to Pres. Nelson, a man who has seen firsthand the kind of damage bullets can do to a person’s insides.
Controversial talks encourage thought and dialogue. And if the content is controversial in a negative way to most of us regular W&T readers, maybe it will stoke enough grass roots resentment that could lead to positive change down the road.
@ Need Screen Name – for amatuer golfers, par for the course is reaaalllyyy good. So thank you. You are right though, conference could do much much better at reaching kids and youth. But does the average conference speaker really know much about kids these days?
Given that the new FP has already been set apart in direct opposition to the guides in D&C 20 without the sustaining vote of the church, I don’t feel there is much worth watching. If they are willing to directly violate modern scripture, I don’t know that we can look to them for continued divine guidance.
For those our us in the hinterlands, . . . What are the rumored changes?
EJ-
You might want to read the following post. After reading it, I would be interested in knowing your thoughts.
https://mylifebygogogoff.com/2018/01/the-5-things-that-will-happen-with-the-passing-of-president-monson.html
I’m hoping for a full repudiation of Democratic politics. I know—IT. WILL. NEVER. HAPPEN.
I’m feeling a novel, and and soon-to-be classic, hymn or arrangement from the choir. I’m hoping for an atonal “A – men” at the end, but I’m afraid I’ll be (partly) disappointed.
I advocate for an adult session on Saturday evening and not have men’s and women’s meetings. I suggest they use that time to focus on a hot topic and have in-depth explanation of history, possibly by a non-GA historian, and followed up by talk on same subject by an Apostle who then shares his thoughts on the history, and how we should be studying, pondering, dealing with it today.
Could start with translation vs revalation of BOM and BOA. Neither are translations. What are the facts and how do we make sense of that.. so many topics we need to discuss.
New curriculum has a topic to focus 4th Sunday discussions x 6mo. This forum could be the setting for the introduction of that topic.
I’m also hoping Elder Uchtdorf will come out swinging and tackle the tough topics head on regardless. I want to believe he will do the right thing.
Interesting proposal Maura. I like it.