NOM

Myself and many others have long criticized the lack of diversity in the within the twelve. They've begin to rectify this with Gong and Soares, so I think they deserve some kudos. I didn't believe they'd step outside of the white Utah professional, but they did, and it's a refreshing surprise.

Yet, on message boards, it seems that people are more upset that they can no longer level the all white criticism. We can't set up a paradigm where the church is always damed if they do and damed if they don't, because then our voices will be even more marginalized than they already are. I say congratulate when it's due, even if it's a small step.

I do praise them for choices that definitely surprised me. But it's very faint praise and extremely mild surprise. It's not as low as the sound of one hand clapping. I think I could manage one full clap. But their actions really don't deserve more.

Gong is an American, though his ethnic background is different than usual for the church. Soares is a bigger step for the church.

But this is a step that should've happened decades ago. I honestly can't give them kudos for doing what they should have done long ago when so much more is needed. In this age, this a step in the right direction but it demonstrates just how far behind they are. They're being dragged into the modern world and demonstrating their utter lack of prophetic ability.

If they actually addressed the issues of today today that might be worth kudos. As prophets if they actually addressed the issues of tomorrow today they would demonstrate some worthiness of their proclaimed title.

"Close your eyes, for your eyes will only tell the truth,
And the truth isn't what you want to see" (Charles Hart, "The Music of the Night")

I attended priesthood session last night and was pleased with how that meeting was used by Nelson. It was very different than previous meetings. I was also quite surprised with the changes. It takes balls to demote your most faithful group of supporters.

There are much bigger issues than lack of diversity for me, so this is just a “oh, that’s cool” moment. I would be happier to see diversity of thought, but every new guy just continues to kiss butt and toe the line. Uchtdorf was the only glimmer of hope....but got demoted for being too honest.

2bizE wrote: ↑Sun Apr 01, 2018 8:38 am I attended priesthood session last night and was pleased with how that meeting was used by Nelson. It was very different than previous meetings. I was also quite surprised with the changes. It takes balls to demote your most faithful group of supporters.

So you think the High Priests will see it as a demotion that they don't get to have their exclusive little Sunday meeting anymore, and have to share it with the Elders?

nehor90210 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 01, 2018 9:10 am

2bizE wrote: ↑Sun Apr 01, 2018 8:38 am I attended priesthood session last night and was pleased with how that meeting was used by Nelson. It was very different than previous meetings. I was also quite surprised with the changes. It takes balls to demote your most faithful group of supporters.

So you think the High Priests will see it as a demotion that they don't get to have their exclusive little Sunday meeting anymore, and have to share it with the Elders?

I saw it as a demotion for the elders, because I imagine the high priests will be put in charge of the new quorum.

I agree w/ Oliver. If they had called 2 new white guys from Ut or Idaho, we'd all be saying "they don't get that the church needs diversity, lots of people can't relate because it's just a Ut church run by old white guys, etc"

But they didn't. I believe this shows they are listening. And big or little, too late, whatever...it is a positive step in the right direction.

StarbucksMom wrote: ↑Sun Apr 01, 2018 10:35 am I agree w/ Oliver. If they had called 2 new white guys from Ut or Idaho, we'd all be saying "they don't get that the church needs diversity, lots of people can't relate because it's just a Ut church run by old white guys, etc"

But they didn't. I believe this shows they are listening. And big or little, too late, whatever...it is a positive step in the right direction.

The biggest thing I see is that the two new apostles are not related by blood or marriage. So, yes it is a step in the right direction, maybe two steps. Even if our new apostle from South America is Caucasian. And even if our new apostle of Asian descent is one who was born in California, we have at least taken a couple of steps away from descended from early church leaders. I would rather have seen one of the seventy from Africa, or someone of Native American blood from South America, or better yet someone of mixed heritage (black, native, Caucasian mixed, to the point they are just a nice beautiful brown) as is so common in Brazil. So, I see they have taken two baby steps toward diversity. But really I want a black woman, just so everyone is clear on my hopes.

alas wrote:But really I want a black woman, just so everyone is clear on my hopes.

I'd be willing to settle for any woman. That might get them almost into this century. That's still a long ways to go for equality but that would be a notable step.

"Close your eyes, for your eyes will only tell the truth,
And the truth isn't what you want to see" (Charles Hart, "The Music of the Night")

I agree strongly with this.

My mom treated me in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" way. When I actually cleaned my room, I got "Shocker!" and "Finally!" By the time I was 11, I tried to ignore what she thought about anything. Why should I listen? It was all negative no matter what.

I think that whether active, believing members want to or not, they care about what disaffected members think - especially the ones we're related to. I know I don't want to be ignored.

ETA: One critical part of my strategy for having a good relationship with my wife is to acknowledge when the church does actual good or improves. I don't have to lie. There's been enough to comment on so far.

FWIW, one thing I appreciate greatly is getting more diversity of thought in the Q15 by calling Elder Gong.

Me, I'm just looking forward to when Gong becomes CEO.

President GONG!!!

Has a nice "ring" to it, no?

(Actually, if I'm not dead when GONG! becomes CEO, I hope that I care about all this craziness a whole lot less...)

Both are still "white" professionals. No dark skinned or black apostle has been called. Not that it is necessary to prove a point and satisfy the world, but both new apostles aren't representatives of minorities.

alas wrote: ↑Sun Apr 01, 2018 10:46 am

StarbucksMom wrote: ↑Sun Apr 01, 2018 10:35 am I agree w/ Oliver. If they had called 2 new white guys from Ut or Idaho, we'd all be saying "they don't get that the church needs diversity, lots of people can't relate because it's just a Ut church run by old white guys, etc"

But they didn't. I believe this shows they are listening. And big or little, too late, whatever...it is a positive step in the right direction.

The biggest thing I see is that the two new apostles are not related by blood or marriage. So, yes it is a step in the right direction, maybe two steps. Even if our new apostle from South America is Caucasian. And even if our new apostle of Asian descent is one who was born in California, we have at least taken a couple of steps away from descended from early church leaders. I would rather have seen one of the seventy from Africa, or someone of Native American blood from South America, or better yet someone of mixed heritage (black, native, Caucasian mixed, to the point they are just a nice beautiful brown) as is so common in Brazil. So, I see they have taken two baby steps toward diversity. But really I want a black woman, just so everyone is clear on my hopes.

Gong is married to a daughter of a GA (apostle?), or so I was told.

I can charitably say that this is a reasonable first step. Elder Gong and Elder Soares will likely be helpful in LDS efforts in East Asia and South America. It's a good move. I can certainly accept the criticism of other that representation for the largest area of LDS growth in Africa is not yet represented. Nor do we have any representation from the two most interesting new temple locations, Russia and India.

Let's see if this newly reconstituted quorum and presidency can start providing substantive reasons why any of us should pay any attention to them. If it were not for the involvement of my family I would have focused on quite different Sunday activities long ago. These are all bright men (heh, wise guys?) and perhaps they can focus on better answers than we have received so far.

Thoughtful wrote: ↑Sun Apr 01, 2018 10:18 pm

alas wrote: ↑Sun Apr 01, 2018 10:46 am

StarbucksMom wrote: ↑Sun Apr 01, 2018 10:35 am I agree w/ Oliver. If they had called 2 new white guys from Ut or Idaho, we'd all be saying "they don't get that the church needs diversity, lots of people can't relate because it's just a Ut church run by old white guys, etc"

But they didn't. I believe this shows they are listening. And big or little, too late, whatever...it is a positive step in the right direction.

The biggest thing I see is that the two new apostles are not related by blood or marriage. So, yes it is a step in the right direction, maybe two steps. Even if our new apostle from South America is Caucasian. And even if our new apostle of Asian descent is one who was born in California, we have at least taken a couple of steps away from descended from early church leaders. I would rather have seen one of the seventy from Africa, or someone of Native American blood from South America, or better yet someone of mixed heritage (black, native, Caucasian mixed, to the point they are just a nice beautiful brown) as is so common in Brazil. So, I see they have taken two baby steps toward diversity. But really I want a black woman, just so everyone is clear on my hopes.

Gong is married to a daughter of a GA (apostle?), or so I was told.

If he is really a son in law to another apostle, then consider me less than impressed. I don't care about his genes coming from the orient as much as I care about the nauseating amount of keeping it all in the family. Puke.

Speaking of wives, someone on another site said the Sister Soares was a person of color, could she possibly have Native American blood? Anyone know about her.

That at least might subtract off the from SO unimpressed that Gong is a SIL

This thread about Elder Gong at StayLDS is worth keeping an eye on:

http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=8856

This anecdote from Curt Sunshine (site admin) in particular seems important:

A friend of mine shared that Elder Gong's [gay] son had a showing of his art at a gallery. Elder Gong attended the opening, asked intelligent questions, and thanked my friend for helping his son get broader exposure for his art.

The art was about explicitly queer issues, and the central topic was families rejecting queer youth.

This story was also quoted from a Facebook post at r/exmormon, with similar details.

I agree. I had been blissfullly unaware of the Joseph Bishop scandal until Thursday night when the Church announced its policy change. It also reiterated the Church's official stance on abuse. I was flustered by this, because I wanted to complain. I wanted to criticize. The Church is listening and responding. I should be glad!

However, a lot of it is the Church isn't acknowledging its wrongdoing and the people that have been harmed as a result of it and I think I would feel a whole lot less flustered if the Church did that.

At the end of the day, though, there is some change and my continuing wanting to complain is essentially ego.

As a middle school teacher (now retired) I was periodically reminded that we need to praise our students more than criticize them. We definitely should respond positively to progress in the Church, no matter what degree of activity we practice. I hold out hope that the Church will evolve into a more Christian and humane organization that would be a help in my search for truth. I try to share my small share of light/truth with others, with the hope that we all might grow together. Where I am wrong, I hope I am willing to change. In Church I was taught that to be teachable, one must be humble. Each of us can only perceive a small fraction of the universe we are part of. Maybe that is a good thing.

I think my big problem is that deep down inside i want out, like for realsies out, but I don't want to be alone. If the church did everything I wanted, then maybe I wouldn't want to be out, who knows. What has happened is that they have done just enough to re-vitalize many of those around me so that their interest and devotion has been rekindled.

I guess it feels much more like a lose-lose compromise than a win-win solution. So yeah, there have been some moves in the right direction but to what end? Is it to appease just enough to draw this out longer? If so then yes, in some ways this just makes things worse. Like a war where the other side can talk peace long enough to build more weapons and keep oppressing their people, just not as much as before. Maybe I am just bitter, I suppose, but this does not excite me.

Thoughtful wrote: ↑Sun Apr 01, 2018 10:18 pm Gong is married to a daughter of a GA (apostle?), or so I was told.

Indeed. According to his official bio on lds.org he married Susan Lindsay. His Wikipedia article gives more detail:

Gong is married to Susan Lindsay, a daughter of Richard P. Lindsay. They first met when Gong was a BYU student who would give presentations on Taiwan's culture to missionaries about to depart for Taiwan from the Missionary Training Center, among whom was Lindsay. They began dating a few years later, in the summer when Gong had returned from Oxford to spend a few weeks with his parents, during a time his father was a BYU professor. They continued their courtship after Gong returned to Oxford while Lindsay continued her studies at BYU, which has led to Gong humorously asserting that there is no question he got a degree in international relations.[14] The Gongs married in the Salt Lake Temple on January 2, 1980, and are the parents of four sons.[15] Prior to joining the BYU administration the Gongs had spent most of their married life in Maryland and Virginia.

Checking out his father-in-law's Wikipedia bio we see that Gong married into strong Utah connections. Richard was a GA. Richard caught a ride to college every day with a son of Joseph F. Smith. Susan's mother was Marian Bangerter, with a last name that might be familiar to people in Utah. Richard was a counselor in a bishopric to Victor L. Brown. Richard was managing director of Public Affairs for the LDS Church for many years.

After his release as a general authority in 1994, Lindsay was the LDS Church's representative in various anti-pornography initiatives. He was named the national education director of the Religious Alliance Against Pornography in 1995.[4] He also worked on fighting alcohol abuse, for which he was honored by the American Council on Alcohol Problems in 1996.

Gong had a lot of Utah and Church connections himself. By marrying into the Lindsay family he picked up a ton more. He's got a different ethnic heritage himself but he has lots of connections into the same families. He doesn't descend from "pioneer stock", but his kids do. Choosing him is a step different, but not a terribly large one.