
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Yesterday and today, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the largest Mormon denomination, gathered for our General Conference.
General Conference is a long-standing tradition, generally held two times per year since 1830. My understanding is that there have only been two or three exceptions, depending on how we count. There were no conferences in 1846 due to complexities associated with leaving Nauvoo. And there was only one of two conferences in 1957 because of a pandemic.
For the last couple decades, it has also been a tradition for some Church members to share our thoughts and interact with each other during the conference via social media, particularly X (formerly Twitter). I have often participated in that. My participation has slowed down a bit, due in part to decreasing popularity of X. But, at least for now, I’m back with more.
Thoughts on ConferenceBelow is an edited list of the thoughts that I shared on X about the first day (Saturday) of October 2024 General Conference – more below about the absence of the second day. They include thoughtful affirmations and elaborations, as well as constructive criticisms. As always, my intent is to promote serious engagement with the ideas and experiences that Church leaders share during the conference. And I welcome your feedback and questions in the comments.
If you’ve read my thoughts on conference before, you probably noticed that this list is shorter than usual. And if you’re familiar with the conference schedule, you probably noticed that the list doesn’t include thoughts from the second day. This is because my X account was temporarily locked during the second day of the conference. Why?
Look through the list of thoughts that I shared. Which seems most controversial to you? Which seems most likely to provoke the most responses, questions, and criticisms? As things turned out, it’s probably not the one you think.
To my surprise, #21 proved to be the most controversial. In it, I express my interest in hearing from more women during conference. Here it is again:
“Dear leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I would like to hear from more women in general conference. Thanks for your consideration.”
In response, I received a surprising deluge of comments. Most were negative in tone. And most appeared to come from a narrow segment of illiberal conservative Church members. Here’s a sampling:
“Way to discount the women who did speak.”
“Forward this message to @jesuschrist. He makes the final decisions.”
“Why?”
“*trans women of color”
“Shouldn’t matter brother. Just enjoy the lessons taught. Doesn’t matter who is delivering them”
“SIMP.”
“Does it matter if you don’t follow the counsel either way?”
“Sounds like you missed some messages the Lord prepared for you to hear and embrace.”
“I disagree so our votes cancel out”
[An image of a man peering back skeptically.]
“I don’t understand why… Why it matters… why you need to hear from women?”
“No one wants to hear more women in Conference … remember … the Prophet prays about that.”
“No thanks”
“Just heard from this amazing woman. Will you heed what she says?”
“Because he needs to light off a big virtue signal so the people who hate his supposed beliefs and him might, one day, like him. (Hint: they won’t)”
“Keep that ark steady.”
I was surprised at the relative quantity and quality of negative responses. Although about a dozen users selected the heart on my post to indicate that they liked it, none of them commented during conference (some commented later, particularly after noting the negative comments). All of the comments during conference were expressions of interrogation, disagreement, dismissal, criticism, or ridicule. Apparently no one who read my post during conference felt strongly enough about the matter to express a positive response with the same degree of effort.
Their presumptions blindsided me. By expressing interest in more women speaking, apparently I was discounting the women who spoke, advocating for the extremes of progressive ideology, pandering to women, virtue signaling to enemies of the Church, and ignoring Church leaders. I’m accustomed to people making poor assumptions about me. But I didn’t anticipate the cause and breadth of the poor assumptions in this case.
Their politics annoyed me. Extreme progressives have perfected ideological sanctimony. In response, extreme conservatives have carefully cultivated a language of ridicule that they apply to just about anyone less conservative, whether progressive or not. If we say something they disagree with, they characterize us in contorted terms of their antagonists, undermining the possibility of real dialogue.
Their passive sanctimony exhausted me. Apparently Church leaders have already done all the necessary thinking and acting on the subject. So Church members should perceive expressions of different desires and asking questions as assaults on the authority of the Church. And those engaging in such assaults are approaching apostasy at best, if they’re not already outright evil.
My interactions with these users culminated in an exchange with a particular user whose X profile asserts, “progmos should be purged.” In case you’re unfamiliar with the term, “progmo” is slang for a progressive Mormon – a Mormon who is perhaps progressive generally, but most particularly progressive politically. When I saw his profile, despite my disagreements with political progressives, I was repulsed. And I told him so.
This X user explained to me that he wished progressive Mormons to be purged from the Church for their own good. His disagreements with them indicate to him that they aren’t living in accordance with the teachings of the Church. I told him that I am equally repulsed by progressive Mormons that wish to purge conservative Mormons. But, given that his own behavior isn’t in accordance with the teachings of the Church and by his own reasoning, maybe he should purge himself.
“I recognize relatively little of the religion advocated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in my limited exposure to your behavior. Maybe you should purge yourself, per your reasoning on the benefit.”
After I posted that comment, X automatically imposed a temporary lock on my ability to comment. Their email to me said that I had violated their rule against violent speech. So the other X user gets to encourage the purging of “progmos” from the Church. But I can’t tell him that consistent application of his justification should lead him to purge himself.
Because my X account was temporarily locked, I enjoyed the second day of conference without X. And I decided not to worry about composing more thoughts for publication. Regardless, there were plenty of thought-provoking speakers and moments during the second day. They’re worthy of engagement.
Love for the ChurchAfter observing the commentary that led to my X account being temporarily locked, some friends (and even some strangers) commented to me that they don’t understand how I can be so patient with the behavior of some Church members. My first thought, in response, was that I don’t always feel patient toward them. But I’m glad that I come across as patient, at least to some observers.
I know the behavior of illiberal members of the Church (usually illiberal conservatives, given the makeup of the Church, but also illiberal progressives) has contributed to feelings of alienation among other Church members. And those feelings have contributed to some leaving the Church. All of this makes me sad. And I sympathize.
I’m not a stranger (ironically) to feelings of alienation in Church. It’s something I’ve wrestled with for most of my life, going back to adolescence, and with particular force during years of closet atheism as a young adult. Most of the time, in recent decades, that wrestling has been a muted background emotion.
But those feelings aren’t the whole story. They’re offset by an observation and another emotion.
The observation is that social media algorithms often amplify frictions with marginal groups. In this particular case, X probably showed my post most often to people who would react most strongly to it. Apparently, that was predominantly some Church members who are illiberal conservatives, quick to engage with hostility anyone they perceive (wrongly, in this case) to be advocating progressive politics. If we too easily generalize the behavior of these Church members to Church membership as a whole, we’re being manipulated by the algorithms as much as they are.
The other emotion is love. I love the Church, like an extension of my family, even when we don’t get along as well as I’d like. I know that doesn’t work for everyone. But, for me, this is still the place.
Despite (and sometimes admittedly to spite) the poor behavior of some fellow Church members, I’m engaged in the effort to tell our story better. I trust actively in our aspirations to participate with God in realizing the full Church of Christ. And I’m committed to Mormonism’s audacious vision of eventual heaven of Earth – not an escapist euphemism for death, but a heaven as real as light and as warm as love.
I invite you to join me in the work and at Church. Sometimes the challenge is hard – maybe even often. But, in my experience and by my estimation, the challenge is sublimely worthy.
More Thoughts on General ConferenceIf you enjoyed reading my thoughts on this general conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you might also enjoy reading my thoughts on other general conferences. Here's a list, in reverse chronological order, of the conferences for which I've published thoughts:
By Lincoln CannonYesterday and today, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the largest Mormon denomination, gathered for our General Conference.
General Conference is a long-standing tradition, generally held two times per year since 1830. My understanding is that there have only been two or three exceptions, depending on how we count. There were no conferences in 1846 due to complexities associated with leaving Nauvoo. And there was only one of two conferences in 1957 because of a pandemic.
For the last couple decades, it has also been a tradition for some Church members to share our thoughts and interact with each other during the conference via social media, particularly X (formerly Twitter). I have often participated in that. My participation has slowed down a bit, due in part to decreasing popularity of X. But, at least for now, I’m back with more.
Thoughts on ConferenceBelow is an edited list of the thoughts that I shared on X about the first day (Saturday) of October 2024 General Conference – more below about the absence of the second day. They include thoughtful affirmations and elaborations, as well as constructive criticisms. As always, my intent is to promote serious engagement with the ideas and experiences that Church leaders share during the conference. And I welcome your feedback and questions in the comments.
If you’ve read my thoughts on conference before, you probably noticed that this list is shorter than usual. And if you’re familiar with the conference schedule, you probably noticed that the list doesn’t include thoughts from the second day. This is because my X account was temporarily locked during the second day of the conference. Why?
Look through the list of thoughts that I shared. Which seems most controversial to you? Which seems most likely to provoke the most responses, questions, and criticisms? As things turned out, it’s probably not the one you think.
To my surprise, #21 proved to be the most controversial. In it, I express my interest in hearing from more women during conference. Here it is again:
“Dear leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I would like to hear from more women in general conference. Thanks for your consideration.”
In response, I received a surprising deluge of comments. Most were negative in tone. And most appeared to come from a narrow segment of illiberal conservative Church members. Here’s a sampling:
“Way to discount the women who did speak.”
“Forward this message to @jesuschrist. He makes the final decisions.”
“Why?”
“*trans women of color”
“Shouldn’t matter brother. Just enjoy the lessons taught. Doesn’t matter who is delivering them”
“SIMP.”
“Does it matter if you don’t follow the counsel either way?”
“Sounds like you missed some messages the Lord prepared for you to hear and embrace.”
“I disagree so our votes cancel out”
[An image of a man peering back skeptically.]
“I don’t understand why… Why it matters… why you need to hear from women?”
“No one wants to hear more women in Conference … remember … the Prophet prays about that.”
“No thanks”
“Just heard from this amazing woman. Will you heed what she says?”
“Because he needs to light off a big virtue signal so the people who hate his supposed beliefs and him might, one day, like him. (Hint: they won’t)”
“Keep that ark steady.”
I was surprised at the relative quantity and quality of negative responses. Although about a dozen users selected the heart on my post to indicate that they liked it, none of them commented during conference (some commented later, particularly after noting the negative comments). All of the comments during conference were expressions of interrogation, disagreement, dismissal, criticism, or ridicule. Apparently no one who read my post during conference felt strongly enough about the matter to express a positive response with the same degree of effort.
Their presumptions blindsided me. By expressing interest in more women speaking, apparently I was discounting the women who spoke, advocating for the extremes of progressive ideology, pandering to women, virtue signaling to enemies of the Church, and ignoring Church leaders. I’m accustomed to people making poor assumptions about me. But I didn’t anticipate the cause and breadth of the poor assumptions in this case.
Their politics annoyed me. Extreme progressives have perfected ideological sanctimony. In response, extreme conservatives have carefully cultivated a language of ridicule that they apply to just about anyone less conservative, whether progressive or not. If we say something they disagree with, they characterize us in contorted terms of their antagonists, undermining the possibility of real dialogue.
Their passive sanctimony exhausted me. Apparently Church leaders have already done all the necessary thinking and acting on the subject. So Church members should perceive expressions of different desires and asking questions as assaults on the authority of the Church. And those engaging in such assaults are approaching apostasy at best, if they’re not already outright evil.
My interactions with these users culminated in an exchange with a particular user whose X profile asserts, “progmos should be purged.” In case you’re unfamiliar with the term, “progmo” is slang for a progressive Mormon – a Mormon who is perhaps progressive generally, but most particularly progressive politically. When I saw his profile, despite my disagreements with political progressives, I was repulsed. And I told him so.
This X user explained to me that he wished progressive Mormons to be purged from the Church for their own good. His disagreements with them indicate to him that they aren’t living in accordance with the teachings of the Church. I told him that I am equally repulsed by progressive Mormons that wish to purge conservative Mormons. But, given that his own behavior isn’t in accordance with the teachings of the Church and by his own reasoning, maybe he should purge himself.
“I recognize relatively little of the religion advocated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in my limited exposure to your behavior. Maybe you should purge yourself, per your reasoning on the benefit.”
After I posted that comment, X automatically imposed a temporary lock on my ability to comment. Their email to me said that I had violated their rule against violent speech. So the other X user gets to encourage the purging of “progmos” from the Church. But I can’t tell him that consistent application of his justification should lead him to purge himself.
Because my X account was temporarily locked, I enjoyed the second day of conference without X. And I decided not to worry about composing more thoughts for publication. Regardless, there were plenty of thought-provoking speakers and moments during the second day. They’re worthy of engagement.
Love for the ChurchAfter observing the commentary that led to my X account being temporarily locked, some friends (and even some strangers) commented to me that they don’t understand how I can be so patient with the behavior of some Church members. My first thought, in response, was that I don’t always feel patient toward them. But I’m glad that I come across as patient, at least to some observers.
I know the behavior of illiberal members of the Church (usually illiberal conservatives, given the makeup of the Church, but also illiberal progressives) has contributed to feelings of alienation among other Church members. And those feelings have contributed to some leaving the Church. All of this makes me sad. And I sympathize.
I’m not a stranger (ironically) to feelings of alienation in Church. It’s something I’ve wrestled with for most of my life, going back to adolescence, and with particular force during years of closet atheism as a young adult. Most of the time, in recent decades, that wrestling has been a muted background emotion.
But those feelings aren’t the whole story. They’re offset by an observation and another emotion.
The observation is that social media algorithms often amplify frictions with marginal groups. In this particular case, X probably showed my post most often to people who would react most strongly to it. Apparently, that was predominantly some Church members who are illiberal conservatives, quick to engage with hostility anyone they perceive (wrongly, in this case) to be advocating progressive politics. If we too easily generalize the behavior of these Church members to Church membership as a whole, we’re being manipulated by the algorithms as much as they are.
The other emotion is love. I love the Church, like an extension of my family, even when we don’t get along as well as I’d like. I know that doesn’t work for everyone. But, for me, this is still the place.
Despite (and sometimes admittedly to spite) the poor behavior of some fellow Church members, I’m engaged in the effort to tell our story better. I trust actively in our aspirations to participate with God in realizing the full Church of Christ. And I’m committed to Mormonism’s audacious vision of eventual heaven of Earth – not an escapist euphemism for death, but a heaven as real as light and as warm as love.
I invite you to join me in the work and at Church. Sometimes the challenge is hard – maybe even often. But, in my experience and by my estimation, the challenge is sublimely worthy.
More Thoughts on General ConferenceIf you enjoyed reading my thoughts on this general conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you might also enjoy reading my thoughts on other general conferences. Here's a list, in reverse chronological order, of the conferences for which I've published thoughts:

21,245 Listeners

16,525 Listeners

3 Listeners