I watched Conference so you don’t have to. Well, I watched three-fifths of Conference and even then my notes are a little sketchy. If there was anything praiseworthy or of good report in the Saturday Evening or Sunday Afternoon sessions, feel free to leave a blurb in the comments.
Saturday Morning
Elder Holland, of the Twelve — talked about Apostles, pride, and bore a standard testimony.
Camille M. Johnson, RS General President — contrasted and compared spiritual healing and wholeness with physical and emotional healing and wholeness. You can be spiritually healed (through priesthood blessings?) even though your mental and physical illnesses take time to heal or just never do. New Mormon phrase alert: “oil of conversion” (when talking about the parable of the five virgins).
Elder Rasband, of the Twelve — another new Mormon phrase: “hastening is happening.” The Church is growing, growing, growing, as evidenced by lots of new LDS temples and 308,000 convert baptisms in 2024. [I don’t trust LDS statistics: they only reveal selected stats and they get cagey with the numbers even then.]
Elder Cook — Jesus rescues us from the storms of life, thru the Atonement. Upbeat Mormon phrase: “Live optimistically, on the sunny side of the street.”
Ricardo P. Giminez, of the Seventy — more Jesus. Mormon phrase: “covenantal love.”
Pres. Eyring — more Jesus. Nice thoughts on the road to Emmaus encounter.
Summary: None of these talks were really home runs (that is, talks that will get a lot of attention in coming weeks). I noticed lots of new buzzword phrases, as highlighted above. If you visit your parent’s house for dinner next Sunday, try dropping “I’ve decided to live on the sunny side of the street this year,” and watch your mother beam with joy.
Saturday Afternoon
Elder Anderson, of the Twelve — He talked a lot about abortion, more gently than usual for an LDS talk. Directs everyone to give support of all kinds to unwed young women who become pregnant, whether they carry the baby through to birth or choose some other option. He specifically and in noticeable detail spelled out three exceptions to the LDS “no abortion” rule, namely cases of rape or incest, serious threat to the mother’s life or health, and cases where the fetus is subject to a serious condition that brings viability into doubt.
Steven J. Lund, YM General President — celebrates LDS young men and the Aaronic Prieshood.
S. Mark Palmer, of the Seventy — Parable of the toppled willow tree, referring to those who have lost their roots in the Church. Replant those roots! You can come back!
Sandino Roman, of the Seventy — How not to rescue a drowning friend.
Elder Renlund, of the Twelve — Don’t be scared of the Second Coming! Reviews three parable from Matthew 25. If you are a righteous person and an obedient Mormon, you don’t have anything to fear from the Second Coming, depite all the scary talk one often hears in Church.
Hans T. Boom, of the Seventy — family motto: just carry on. He’s Dutch, and yes that’s really his name. Great name.
Elder Uchtdorf, of the Twelve (rocking a bright green tie) — He brought a friend to church and got a big surprise. Don’t categorize or label people in order to create division. This was an Uchtdorf of old talk.
Summary: More bang for your buck in this sesson, some nice talks. Elder Anderson’s comments on abortion will get the most attention, so it’s my GA Talk of the Weekend. As LDS abortion talks go, this is fairly positive, but that’s sort of like the tallest midget award.
Sunday Morning
Elder Bednar, of the Twelve — reviewed early LDS history, setting up the Church, priesthood, basic LDS Godhead theology, keys, translation of the Book of Mormon. You’ve heard this talk before.
Steven D. Shumway, of the Seventy — accept all callings, even if outside your comfort zone.
Tamara W. Runia, 1C in the YW General Presidency — You’re good enough!
Gerald Causse, Presiding Bishop — God loves you, etc. Apologies, but I just don’t have the time to look up how to insert the accent marks on his name. It seems like he has been Presiding Bishop for about thirty years now.
Gerritt W. Gong, of the Twelve — Jesus wept. He wipes away our tears. How could he give this talk and not spend at least one paragraph acknowledging Terryl Givens’ book The God Who Weeps?
John A. McCune, of the Seventy — Discipleship, and a few Japanese characters.
Pres. Oaks — He is the Champion of Enumerated Lists, and I thank him for it. Four things God gives us to help us choose the right: (1) the Spirit of Christ; (2) commandments, ordinances, and covenants; (3) manifestations of the Holy Ghost; and (4) the Gift of the Holy Ghost. Read the talk and try to figure out the difference between items 3 and 4.
Summary: No home runs in this session. I enjoy Elder Gong’s talks, always insightful and modest in scope. President Oaks didn’t go political this time. Of the Big Four (the First Presidency and the Acting President of the Twelve, Elder Holland), Pres. Oaks was the only one who actually stood at the pulpit to deliver a talk. Elder Holland and Pres. Eyring spoke while seated, and Pres. Nelson gave a pre-recorded talk, shown on Sunday afternoon. Fifteen new temples were also announced.
Final Thoughts: Was there anything in the Saturday Evening or Sunday Afternoon sessions that addressed, even in a subtle way, the deterioration of politics and the economy and respect for judges and the law in the US under Trump Part 2? Given how closely the Church is tied to the US and to the Republican Party, and given how reliably conservative and Republican Mormon voters are, my gosh they just have to say something! What good are prophets, who in Israel boldly spoke truth and issued warnings to Israelite kings, when today they seem to always choose to keep their heads down and not rock the boat? They’ve already lost half the LDS US membership to MAGA, which is turning “Mormon” and “LDS” into a toxic brand that lots of folks no longer want to be associated with. What would it take for one of them to stand at the pulpit and lower the boom? There are some Mormon heroes in the disgusting story of Trump and MAGA politics. They are all Mormon politicians. Not a single LDS leader; they all seem to be AWOL as we face the greatest challenge of this generation.
Wheat & Tares 
I totaly agree with you9r final thoughts in this post.
Nelson reiterated his peacemaking message from 2 years ago. I got the sense that it was influenced by the current political situation, but it’s the only talk of the two sessions I heard that seemed to touch on it at all. As is typical generally of GC talks, the message came across to me as subtle enough that those who most need to hear it will likely assume he was talking about someone else.
IMO Sister Runia gave best most-relatable talk in this conference……another reason we need more women speakers
Didn’t Elder Renland recently tell the women that the guys were aware of their 2nd class status and something would be done? Instead, we got a talk about how a wife should raise her adulterous husband’s pregnant mistress’s child, so that the mother wouldn’t have to abort it.
No husband responsibility here!
And nothing was said about “please don’t abuse your children because you think they are possessed by a demon”, as in Lori Daybell, etc. And denounce “Visions of Glory” also!
Bednar conflated all versions of the First Vision so as to remove any and all differences between them. Relying heavily on the 2d version. It may be just a matter of time, i.e. his becoming the President, until, once again, the Laminates become the principal ancestors of the Indian [sic] people.
Autocorrect! Grrrrr!
While I didn’t watch (was on vacation in the middle of the Caribbean) my social media feed was mostly filled with references to Sister Runia and so I agree with Linda P Furness that her talk seems to be the clear favorite.
I’ll need to look up where the 15 temples.
I thought Sister Runia’s talk was a home run.
I loved the whole thing. I was impressed by how powerful the seventies’ and auxiliary leaders’ talks were.
Mexico will have 25 temples! In spite of the all the problems being caused by the Gadianton Robbers in Mexico and Central America–the Lamanites are blossoming as the rose. It’s a wondrous thing to see prophecy in the process of fulfillment.
President Nelson’s talk was about pure religion, IMO. Focusing on virtue and charity echoes James’ definition of pure religion: to visit the widow and the fatherless and to keep ourselves unspotted from the world. And in temple theology–it is becoming virtuous and charitable that prepares us to meet God.
It seems to me that President Nelson has been urging the saints to become more holy–more spiritually attuned to the infinite–more prepared to receive the Savior.
I agree completely with your final thoughts, but the abortion talk was terrible. He did enumerate the “acceptable” exceptions, but then he proceeded to give examples that negates each one of them. (By the way, how serious does a serious risk to the life or health of a mother have to be in order to be serious enough?) And then he states that anyone who repents of having an abortion can be forgiven. Which sounds supportive on the surface, but still indicates that having any kind of involvement with a origin is a sin. (I can’t go back and fix “a origin because this keeps deleting my entire comment when I go back. Of course I meant to write abortion). As mentioned above, there was little or no discussion of a man’s role in unwanted pregnancies.
When statistics have shown that most women a few years down the road don’t regret their abortion (even though at the time it was a very difficult decision), then I am not sure repenting is necessary. Who is doing the forgiving he is talking about? God? The Church (who had no business even knowing about it)?
And of course like Dot said, if this inappropriate talk is to be given in GC, we certainly need to hear about the cause of the pregnancy, careless dispersal of sperm.
I did not watch, but I’m curious how many, if any, sessions Nelson attended in person. GC is one of the rare moments when we get to see (or not see) how all the apostles are looking.
Dave. Oaks and Eyring both being helped to walk. Holland and Eyring gave talks sitting. RMN attended Sunday afternoon but his talk was prerecorded.
Dave B, I am with Dot and Linda on Elder Anderson’s talk. The talk may have had a gentler delivery, but the message was the same – carry through a pregnancy, no matter the cost to women, (with few exceptions, but even with that, only after concluding that your exception is really an exception that can be accepted), and not much cost to men was mentioned, if at all. The talk was all directed at women, all the burden on women. Men weren’t much mentioned until the next talk where YAY! Isn’t it great to be male and to receive the priesthood!
I read a very exceptional piece just now on the Common Consent website regarding the complexity of abortion. It is well worth reading!
Elder Kearon gave a nice talk Sunday afternoon about God’s unconditional love, which was followed by a talk by a Seventy which seemed to put conditions on God’s love. *Awkward* I agree with all the positive response in the comments to Sister Runia’s talk. Hopefully it helps chip away at the shame culture in the Church – especially geared toward our young women. I heard zero references to current events. No “prophetic voice” in the biblical sense. RMN again, strongly inferred that the second coming is happening like soon, soon. Like next month, it seems. So, I guess that’s a prophecy? I don’t hear DHO talk about second coming stuff a lot, so it will be interesting to see where the focus shifts after he takes over.
My wife and I were on her spring break from teaching school. We didn’t listen to conference but we did talk about it from what we read online in the Deseret News, SL Trib, and various Facebook Accounts. We came away with few things.
Who writes the talks of these speakers. Do they do it themselves or have a staff member do it and then they approve it. We concluded it was probably a little of both but then we wondered even if that were true, is there really a need for a prophet if a staff member ever writes a talk.
With the announcement of 20 more temples we realized that Utah now has 34 temples either built or in the stages of being built and then we wondered how many Walmarts there are. Well Walmart has 59 retail units in Utah, including 41 Supercenters, 10 Neighborhood Markets, and 8 Sam’s Clubs.
There didn’t seem to be any reference to what’s happening in the world today unless it involved abortion. Nothing about immigration, tariffs, how you treat allies, or how leadership effects a country.
We did listen to an interesting book, “Beyond the Tipping Point” by Malcolm Gladwell. He talked about some of the problems in a “monoculture” where everyone is expected to live this ideal life and the pressure it puts on individuals who don’t fit. I guess that was more our general conference talk that resonated with us.
@Jack,
I’m glad you enjoyed General Conference. I would remind you that the Church has now acknowledged, in the introduction to the BoM and other places, that it doesn’t know who the descendants of the Lamanites are. Due to overwhelming scientific evidence, the Church has had to swallow the idea that it is entirely possible that many, if not all, members of the Church with Latin American heritage aren’t actually descended from Lamanites at all. (Yes, the BoM intro says they are “among the ancestors”, instead of “the principal ancestors” of the Native Americans, but there is *zero* evidence of even this much weaker claim, and the Church knows it.)
Many long-time members of the Church in the Americas were crushed to learn that they might not be Lamanites after all when the Church had to back off of its long held position that they were due to overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary. They had felt they were special and were fulfilling the BoM prophecies that you referenced in your comments.
Nowadays, many newer members of the Church in Latin America would just prefer that they not be referred to as Lamanites at all because, first of all, there’s a very good chance they aren’t, and second of all, they are proud of their *real*, non-Lamanite ancestry and culture. Quite frankly, a number of faithful members of the Church with Native American ancestry would find your comment offensive.
I have a friend that was the speech writer for Elder Bednar for years. She wrote all of his speeches when he was at BYU Idaho and continued to write his conference talks when he became an apostle. I don’t know who is writing them now. I wonder if the chat gpt warnings were as much for their speech writers as the general audience.
they do not write all of their speeches. I guess in their eyes hiring the right speech writer is inspiration enough for an apostle.
You mention buzzwords. Isn’t that what conference is all about? Same ol’ spiel about paying, praying, and obeying with some fancy new catchphrase sprinkled in there, like ponderize or think celestial? The catchphrases, mind you, are often a product of well-thought-out planning by writers. Revelation by corporate board. That is how the church is run.
And numbers… Wow just look at all of the temples that they’re saying are going to be built? (Will some of their construction not actually come to fruition, I wonder?) At this point the church can just buy the illusion of growth. They don’t actually need to be filling more pews.
Thanks for the comments, everyone.
Dot and others on Anderson’s abortion talk, I was noting this talk, like others, in passing. I have done much more detailed analysis of LDS abortion policy in several posts here, most recently:
One Step Closer to a Post-Roe World – Wheat & Tares
The recent BCC piece noted above is also worth reading, here:
https://bycommonconsent.com/2025/04/07/abortion-its-not-that-simple/
Here’s an issue that deserves some attention. The LDS exceptions are *not* set up to *permit* an LDS woman to get an abortion, assuming she lives in a US state that permits her to do so legally. Any woman can choose to do so. The LDS exceptions are to give a *defense* to an LDS woman who underwent an abortion (or someone who assisted her) and then later becomes the target of LDS disciplinary action by an LDS local leader. It is a safe harbor, so to speak, supposedly giving some protection to LDS women (or others) from adverse action by an LDS local leader.
Here’s the problem: we have very little information about how many such actions (disciplinary action for abortion) are taken in a given year, although I am sure the Church has that information. It could be close to zero. Then, of those actions, in how many cases do accused LDS raise an “exception defense”? Again, we have almost no info on how often this happens. A very reasonable conclusion to draw from Elder Anderson’s talk is that we as an LDS community, and local leaders in particular, should be showing compassion and support for pregnant women and unwed mothers, *not* starting disciplinary actions against them if abortion is involved. He didn’t come right out and say that, but it is possible, just possible, that there is a bishop or two out there who, in coming months, will face a scenario where he says to himself, “Hmm, in light of Elder Anderson’s talk, maybe instead of holding a church court on this sister who just went through a traumatic experience, I should show a little more love and compassion?”
It may be the case that all this abortion and exception talk is just rhetorical, just LDS leaders banging the abortion drum to keep conservative culture war LDS happy.
About this: “Not a single LDS leader; they all seem to be AWOL as we face the greatest challenge of this generation.”
I am certain that those leaders will tell you that they are “AWL.” That is, they believe that God doesn’t want them to engage on these topics. I am sad for this, because it means that our church is not able to use any “good will” that they have accumulated. And it means that our church runs the risk of further losing relevance. What good is a tool if it isn’t used?
I find it notable that Elder Bednar didn’t mention that it was Jesus’s birthday since it was April 6th on Sunday after all and he was giving a talk on the organization of the church. He must have encountered some information that caused him to change his mind since the last time he spoke on this topic.
As a special educator, I was deeply disturbed by Elder Holland’s talk. I admire the purity and courage of many children. But the example he gave, in graphic detail, of the deacon with muscular dystrophy as he strained to serve the sacrament to his bishop/father, was appalling. The overwhelming effort put forth by the deacon could have been used so much more productively. Our churches, including our stands, should be accessible to all regardless of our ability to walk. It is true that churches are not required to obey the Americans with Disabilities Act. But surely the ADA is a minimum standard, and we could spend some money to make our building structures welcoming to all. And while we are at it, let’s be more consistent in the accommodations we provide to adapt our programs to the needs of our members, rather than pushing members to do the reverse.
Dave, I find it interesting your overall view of Elder Anderson’s was positive. I spend time in nuanced LDS women-only only spaces, and the overwhelming consensus was this talk was HORRIBLE. The anecdote about a “saintly” woman who chooses to raise the child of her husband’s affair partner? Honestly, one of the most damaging things I’ve heard over the pulpit in a long time.
I Write IEPs. Exactly. Here in the UK, our chapels have to be accessible for all, and to that end there are ramps installed at one end of our stands. I sat listening wondering why on earth it was necessary for the poor deacon to struggle so.
But also, I really dislike the way Elder Holland often makes use of other people’s difficult stories to make a point. I commented to one of my brothers, you don’t want to be Elder Holland’s friend, he’ll try and use you in a faith promoting story. But I find it especially troubling in cases such as this where the individual being so used is a minor.
Of course, Elder Anderson was another one using other people’s difficult stories.
Couldn’t agree more on making our churches handicap accessible. My father is wheelchair bound. My mother has been told for almost a decade that a button will be placed on the outside of the building so my elderly mother doesn’t have to open the church door at the same time she’s pushing the wheelchair. She is still waiting….
Oh, yes, let’s do more to accommodate all members. We should be leading in ADA compliance because we are kind loving people. but obviously we are not. I mean, if Jesus was building a chapel and saw someone in a modern wheel chair, would he really ignore that person and say, sorry, guess you can’t get into the building. But obviously we are not kind loving people.
My husband and I once had an interesting calling. It was to help a woman who used a wheel chair to get to church, get in the building, get into her classroom, and then get her home. Her classroom for Sunday school was on the stage, her wheel chair was too wide to go through the Relief Society room door, and there was not even a ramp to get in the building. We had to grab three other guys to carry her wheel chair up the stairs, then down. We did not have a wheel chair accessible van, nor did anyone ever give us a handicapped parking permit. It was the worse, most exhausting calling we ever had and after six months, we begged off saying it was just too hard with our own three children to drive across town to get her, carry the chair up and down stairs, and attend classes with her in case she needed to leave her class for any reason. And, oh, gee, the poor bishop couldn’t get anyone else to do it either, and she simply quit attending. A church shouldn’t be that unwelcoming to someone with disabilities.
I also have a friend who has three disabled children. Her ward was not willing to make any accommodations or help her with her children. Primary teachers refused to let them be in class because they were “difficult” so, of course that family stopped coming.
[Elder Anderson] Directs everyone to give support of all kinds to unwed young women who become pregnant…
Both last time and this time, he asked for members to give financial support (money!) to such women — but I don’t think this instruction has worked its way into any church materials, and no other general authority has repeated the instruction. If we’re referencing Elder Anderson, I think financial support has to be specifically said — saying “support of all kinds” waters down the message.
Yes, Church members who oppose elective abortion should fight abortion by helping these women pay for and raise their children. In other words, Elder Anderson is asking church members to “put your money where there mouth is.” Will anyone heed his counsel?
My kids, 13 and 8, seized on a new excuse to not watch conference this year: This is just a bunch of old white dudes!
I thought Anderson was giving his moral reason for voting for trump, by repeating republican explanations for abortion. The fact that it is based on lies which he repeated in conference?
Those who believe republicans are better on abortion need to look up the global gag rule. Last time trump was in he expanded the gag rule, which is that aid workers in the third world (who often provide family planning advice) could not mention abortion. They could not even say go to a hospital not a witch doctor. The result was 2 million extra abortions, and 10,000 maternal deaths. This time he has eliminated the aid worker all together, so even more carnage for third world women.
Why are these incredibly old men not retiring? What is their motivation for staying in power? I am 76 and can not work more than 4 hours a day. I can still get up by myself and stand, so am much better physically than the top 4.
I see no reason to believe there is any more communication from God than the rest of us have. America’s is being destroyed by Trump, and God has no advice on what we should do? Or more likely some sad old men don’t. The Church as presently constituted is Totally irrelevant in today’s world!
We are having a federal election in Australia on Saturday May 3rd. We have a Labor government (left wing) at present. Polling shows they will likely be returned, hopefully. The right wing parties have tried a few trump ideas like stopping public servants working from home, and being less vigilant on climate change, which were not well recievied by the public. Because of our optional preferential voting system we have increasing numbers of independent MPs in the parliament. We do not have separate elections for prime minister. The prime minister is the leader of the party with most seats in the lower house of parliament. Trumpish ideas are poison.
Some of the campaign is on how we should respond to America with trump. I am in favour of a complete boycot of America, join a new free world led by Europe, and continue to have free trade with the rest of the world. In a restraunt this week a family member was about to buy a coke, when another family member said no that’s an American company, buy Australian, they did.
We will see (a prophet could tell us if we had one) but it looks like trump will isolate America, and damage it badly.
Andersons tall was a dog whistle for Trumpsists. I agree with Nibley- abortion is an issue that distracts from the core of Christianity- clothing the naked and feeding the hungry.
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, right-wing preachers like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson politicized abortion as a rallying cry to unite the religious right, despite it not being their original moral focus. This shift was strategically engineered to mobilize evangelical voters, redirecting attention from issues like segregation and creating a powerful political base through emotional and moral manipulation.
And Anderson’s case studies? Ewww!
His last talk on abortion upset many and made front-page news with a thud. Why didn’t the FP rein him in, especially since there was obviously a memo to focus on happy Jesus-y things and not talk about politics?
Good heavens.
I like Mortimer’s use of dog whistle; from one dictionary: “a subtly aimed political message which is intended for, and can only be understood by, a particular group.” A person who condemns abortion but does nothing to help a woman with an unwanted pregnancy is not living as Jesus did. He did not cast a stone at a woman taken in adultery, for example, although perhaps he could have under the law. Even that is questionable, because he wasn’t an authorized judge, and she had a right to a trial before proper judges. And it takes two to commit adultery, and only one was charged, so there was grotesque unfairness to which Jesus would never be a part. But back to 21st century abortion, I agree with ji that I wish that Elder Anderson would have spoken plainly about financial support. I wish that he would have cited the parable of the mote and the beam, reminding those who would condemn a woman seeking an abortion to worry about the beam in their own eye, perhaps including the beam of hypocrisy, and the beam of not seeing someone naked or hungry and providing neither food nor clothing. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn the world, but to save it. I do see one thing in his talk, or at least I think I see it, and others can correct me if I see wrong. We used to counsel women with unwanted pregnancies to give the child up for adoption, and this was our doctrine, and also that they go through LDS Family Services so that the child would go to a sealed husband/wife. I think that doctrine is not wholly reversed, 180 degrees: we let the woman choose, and (officially at least) support the woman in her choices, though I don’t know if supporting the woman in her choices includes paying her doctor bills, delivery, etc., is she has no insurance. Is Elder Nelson quietly asking bishops to pay for pregnancy, birth, and post-birth medical costs? Maybe yes, but I think his real message, although probably unheard, was directed to anti-abortionists telling them to take a chill pill, and if they oppose abortion, then show your opposition with your purse and not with your mouth. The message was so sweetly delivered that I am not sure that anti-abortionists heard it.
“I think that doctrine is NOW [in place of not] wholly reversed, 180 degrees…” Sorry for the typo!