In the last week FAIR has received an increasing number of queries about the supposed transcript of a talk given by President Boyd K. Packer in the Forest Bend Ward on 12 October 2008.
We have been in touch with Church Public Affairs about this matter. Here are the facts:
- President Packer did indeed speak at the meeting cited.
- No official transcript of his talk was made and that the one circulating by email was typed after the talk was given and should not be considered to be authoritative.
- On 13 May 2004 the First Presidency issued the following letter to all Church units and leaders:
From time to time statements are circulated among members which are inaccurately attributed to the leaders of the Church. Many such statements distort current Church teachings and are often based on rumors and innuendos. They are never transmitted officially, but by word of mouth, e-mail, or other informal means.
We encourage members of the Church to never teach or pass on such statements without verifying that they are from approved Church sources, such as official statements, communications, and publications. Any notes made when General Authorities, Area Authority Seventies, or other general Church officers speak at regional and stake conferences or other meetings should not be distributed without the consent of the speaker. Personal notes are for individual use only. [emphasis added by FAIR]
True spiritual growth is based on studying the scriptures, the teachings of the Brethren, and Church publications.
This sort of thing has happened before. Eight years ago another statement attributed to President Packer circulated widely, claiming that today’s youth were “generals in the war in heaven.” President Packer issued a statement in 2001 denying that he made that statement. Earlier this year the First Presidency released a letter warning the Saints, “This is a false statement. It is not Church doctrine.”
If you receive a copy of the Forest Bend talk by email, please inform the person who sent it to you that it is spurious and should not be used.
Better yet, tell your friends ahead of time. If they haven’t received their own copy yet, they will soon.
Thanks Mike!
Further info will also be added to the FAIR wiki if and when it becomes available. An easy link to pass on to friends or others who wonder about this is:
http://en.fairlatterdaysaints.org/PresidentPacker
I’m so glad you have this on your site. I am so tired of naïve-albeit well-intentioned-members passing this kind of stuff around. My first reaction is to not read it, but first research it and question its accuracy and relevance. Obviously, if a particular message was given to that Ward, it was for that Ward. If there was something the Twelve wanted us to know, they’d tell us all. Gee, they have a hard enough time getting us to attend General Conference twice a year-why don’t we spread those talks around virally? Because they’re not sensational. The gospel is not about being sensational.
-Jerry
I am seaching for some idea to write in my blog… somehow come to your blog. best of luck. Eugene
Thanks! I’ve been trying to get in touch with the Church about this too, so I’m glad to find some answers on whether or not this talk is authentic. Thank you for your help!
Our department secretary at BYU-Hawaii called President Packer’s office on Monday (Oct 20) and inquired about the truth and accuracy of these transcripts (there is another one dated April ’08) circulating online. Here is her reply to me:
= = = = = = = = =
I called the Office of the Twelve and was told by the Sister who answered the phone (as she laughed) that yes, President Packer did speak at his Ward last Sunday, but no, the sister that took notes and circulated his “talk” was not accurate.
President Packer has asked that it not be continued and if you should receive it, to delete it and not pass it on, that would be greatly appreciated. Rather he would like you to refer to his most recent conference talk given two weeks ago. She thanked me for calling to check.
= = = = = = = = =
Take care,
Marcus H. Martins, Ph.D.
Chair, Dept. of Religious Education
BYU-Hawaii
http://w2.byuh.edu/academics/religion/martins.htm
I can appreciate the quality control effort, but it would be nice to get a thumbs up or down. Yes I said this, but it was misinterpreted or the interpretation is correct but that was a personal opinion and not official doctrine, etc. We shouldn’t get to carried away with what’s for the world, and what is for the ward. If he was supposedly talking about a Ward initiative/goal, then that is one thing, If he is talking about global calamities then it’s hard to reason that is only for the members of a specific Ward in SLC.
Cowboy:
Isn’t the fact that President Packer asks us to read his General Conference talk, rather than these notes of his testimony enough of a “this was misinterpreted personal opinion; please go to the correct version” for you?
Frankly, I fail to see how President Packer and others at Church HQ could be more clear.
There’s now a “hotline” you can call at the Church Administrative Offices and hear a recorded message RE Pres. Packer’s “talk” and his position regarding it.
1-800-453-3860, extension 2-2833.
Steve:
I wasn’t intending to be hypercritical of President Packer on this one. He clearly has been the subject of misinterpretation in the past, so I guess I can understand the corporate quality control approach. I just would like to know what was said that got everybody up in arms, vs. what was intended.
I would like to read the original talk if one exists. I find it interesting that he spoke 2 weeks previous and yet still chose to address this congregation regarding personal preparedness. Why not disclose the intention of the talk? I loved the ‘notes’ and have found renewed commitment to be prepared.
Well, even after all the warnings, I heard Bob Lonsbury read it this morning on his radio talk show 570 KNRS. It just fans the flame and spreads it farther.
My grandmother sent it around.
5 minutes later, a friend of hers sent another email stating that she had just talked with Pres. Packers office, who basically stated the same thing as outlined by Marcus H. Martins above.
I would like to state a few things here:
#1. Church doctrine states that we can receive Revelation for those whom we have stewardship. This means that I can receive revelation for myself and my family, that my Bishop can receive revelation for our Ward (including me and my family) and my Stake President can receive revelation for the Stake, (including me and my family) etc, etc, etc…
The information in the talk Pres. Packer gave was to a specific group of people and not to the body of the Church (in general) or to the World at large, or there would be an “official transcript” that would be published to the Church and/or the World.
#2. This isn’t to say that the information in the talk is “bad” or “wrong”, or that we couldn’t use this information to enhance our lives. After all, the 13th Article of Faith states (in part), “If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.”
#3. There are people and organizations (earthly and spiritually) that would love to bring about the destruction of our Church and Faith. It was for this reason that the lost 116 pages of the Book of Mormon were never re-translated. It is also for this reason that Pres. Packer’s office (and the office of the President) have issued the warnings to not distribute and perpetuate unauthorized information.
#4. I would caution everyone to use a healthy measure of “the Spirit of Discernment” and a whole lot of humility and follow the directions of the Church in this matter. Please keep in mind, “in the mouths of two or three witnesses shall every word be established”…when something is “official” in the Church, it has the stamp of approval of the Brethren, which gives you your 2 or 3 (or more) witnesses.
Be careful out there, the internet is a funny place.
Frankly, I don’t give much credit to whoever had so much time in his/her hands so that he/she could be so ready to record President Packer as he unpredictably got up to speak. This whole thing is very shady. He might have said this, but I wouldn’t take every single word here written as actual doctrine from President Packer. I wouldn’t give so much credit to the person who took the time to type this talk, which is not even proof read. Moreover, we all know that people and the media distort information. How do we know this person typed everything word by word? Do we really want to trust this person? I will not take every word here written as doctrine until we have confirmation from President Packer. And yes, I agree with Efialtis, the internet is a funny place.
This article was dicussed in our Welfare meeting this morning. The High Councilman noted the fallicies of this kind of circulation. We have ‘official’ statements from our leaders that are readily available… General Conference, Ensign … Lets make use of them….
A friend shared with me a copy of President Packer’s
testimony last night when we were home teaching. Given the policy and tradition of not recording testimony meetings, its hard for me to believe that anyone’s memory is so good that they can remember and transcribe 6 full typewritten pages of testimony. So I’m not questioning the authenticity of the content – did it really come from President Packer, but the accuracy of what he actually said.
Call 801-240-2833 for a recorded message regarding this letter that is being circulated. This message is recorded from the office of Public Affairs at the Church, not President Packer’s office. Put this baby to rest and get the word out already!
I have read with interest the talk purported to have been given by Pes. Packer in his ward. I recall reading a comment of Pres. Joseph F. Smith given in the October General Conference of 1918 which follows:”Now, let us serve the Lord and keep his commandments, labor in righteousness, and in all things remember our covenants and look for guidance to the captain of the ship, and not be led astray by what may be purported as having come from him when it is done in a corner and not openly and above board and presented to the Church in the proper manner. The Lord bless you is my prayer in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.” As far back as the 1930’s we have been counseled to lay aside the needful things for the good of our families (and neighbors). While I find nothing to argue with in this purported talk of Pres. Packer’s, the warning of the church leaders has or should have directed our thoughts to all these things. If this talk were true, it would have been done “in a corner” and that is not the way the Lord works. We all need to pay heed to the direction of the leaders but we need not make up things and suppose that only one ward is going to privy to it. Why must there always be someone or a group of people who feel privileged to hear what would be meant for the church membership at large. I agree—let it rest with a proper burial.
GOSH I wish PEOPLE get a grip there is more important stuff to circulate and to be informed about
Im sick to my backteeth of the fwds sent by members on talks “given by someone in authority”
Truly what a waste of everyones time…..in some of our darkest hours
Our internet rules are
Never speculate
Always check things out on the Urban legend site or other such places before you comment
Never never Fwd a forward/chainletter/ or those sickly sweet “You will get a blessing if you send this now” rubbish
Forewarned is forearmed
some years ago and every time I add anyone to my address book We ask folk NOT to fwd fwds to us we arent interested
If I get more than two Fwds from a person I send their address to the computers automatic junk mail section and tell them I am doing it and why
Now
I dont get a lot of fwds so my inbox mainly contains useful and wanted stuff
I wish more folk would just NOT fwd fwds
Oh dear, whats all the fuss about. Pres. Packer DID get up in fast and testimony and address his ward. He spoke about the depression and hard times when he was younger. Historical FACT. He spoke about the ongoing financial crisis today. FACT. He said the Saints needed to be taught a lesson. FACT. He said a catastrophe was coming but that it would turn the hearts of the righteous to God. Scriptural FACT. World leaders are predicting a major event that will take place in 09 and a coming depression/financial collapse. FACT. Why do so many Saints hate and despise the truth and love the world so much. FACT.
If by the nature of your declarations of FACT, you mean that President Packer did infact make these statements that I have no comment, as his talk has not and will not be released to the general membership. If by FACT you mean that the assertions preceding your declarations are fact then your comments are highly subjective. The fuss is all about the FACT that President Packer gave a talk in his local congregration, which some members interpreted to be a last days “sounding of the warning bell”. The fuss is about what did President Packer intend by his comments. His office, as well as the Church’s main office have insisted that his comments were intended only for those attending his sacrament meeting that day, and should not be considered an official state of affairs from the Church. I hope this helps clear things up for you.
[I deleted LukeAir08’s last message because it contained attacks on Cowboy’s character and intelligence. Please be polite. – ADMIN]
This “talk” continues to make the rounds. On Dec 28, 2008 I visited a ward in Waynesville, NC and heard it read word for word by the concluding speaker. I’d already heard about this “talk” circulating around and, unfortunately, was a witness to it being presented as if it were official church doctrine. I felt it wasn’t my place to say anything to the bishopric, since I was just visiting, but I did talk to the missionaries about it afterwards. Hopefully, the word got back to the unit leaders and they were able to set things straight.
“No official transcript of his talk was made and that the one circulating by email was typed after the talk was given and should not be considered to be authoritative.”
Interesting – the same could basically be said for nearly all of the material in the Old & New Testaments where Christ is quoted. I suppose that text should all be treated in a similar manner…
i don’t understand all the fuss. why even create “policies” about GA talks? with all our technology, it should be easy to record talks and post these officially on podcasts so that there are no errors. i am confused.
back in scripture days, weren’t all special witnesses of the lord instructed to spread the word to all creatures? didn’t king benjamin build and give a “talk” from a tower built specifically so that everyone could hear his message? back when the internet was first developed, wasn’t it said that the spirit inspired its invention so that God’s work could be spread even further? now that these instructions and prophesies have come to pass, we’re all jumpy about a talk that is verifiable and is in fact apt for our time?
so what was wrong with the talk? and why is E. Packer issuing a disclaimer?
i’ve received many “Christian” types of email forwards over the years. some are verifiable, other are not. the importance of these messages lay in the hope and love it brought to the receipient. whether given by E. Packer or some street corner preacher, doesn’t matter. the message rings true today. [getting off my soapbox now].
I discussed this with my ward a few weeks ago. I started by noting that my brother is a bishop in Indiana. I asked if things my brother told his ward, acting under the direction of the spirit, were binding upon our ward in Utah. The answer, of course, is no, they are not. Why? Because the spirit moved my brother to give guidance that his ward needed, at the time the guidance was given. It wasn’t given for others.
I then stepped it up a level. If my brother’s stake president gave guidance to my brother’s stake in Indiana, is it binding upon our stake in Utah? Of course not–the same rule applies. The spirit moved that stake president to give guidance suitable for his stake, not for others.
Move it up another level. If a general authority (say, Elder Packer) visits a ward and is moved upon by the spirit to give guidance to that ward, is the guidance binding upon my ward? No, it is not. The same principle applies–the spirit is moving the general authority to speak to a specific portion of the Lord’s flock, and the guidance is applicable to them only.
This is why the Church has a policy of not recording and disseminating information given locally by general authorities, beyond the bounds of the locality in which it was given.
As for the viral talk by Elder Packer, it may be interesting, but it is no more applicable to the Church as a whole (to which it was *not* given) than is my brother’s talk to his ward in Indiana.
-Allen
I’m going to change my tune here Allen, but that logic has always troubled me. This discussion came up in my ward last week, and we ran through the same logic. A couple of points
Revelation, Domains of Authority: The argument is incomplete if we are to maintain a cohesive hierarchy, to ask “who” a Bishop can have authority to receive revelation for, if we do not also ask “what” types of revelation a bishop can receive within his ecclesiastical domain. I’ll forego the obvious analysis, but clearly a Bishop and/or an Apostle has limits to what they may say and do within their domains, independent of the Church much more broadly.
When Jesus told the Apostles in the New Testament that he had given them all authority to accomplish his works, should we infer along with most of the evangelicals that this bestowal was to be generally applied beyond the apostles? When he answered their questions about his Second Coming in Matthew 24-25, still a private discussion for a private audience, do we conclude not to take heed to the council because, “well that was a private meeting and only applied to the ancient apostles”? Of course not, we cannot assume that council which is relevant to the entire world, such as allusions to local/national/global calamities, would be relevant to President Packer’s home ward and not the rest of us. A few years ago L. Tom Perry spoke in my stake and established goals for reactivation of “low hanging fruit” in our area. Clearly he spoke to the specific needs of our stake so his comments in that instance should not be taken as council to the broader membership where activation/missionary efforts are uniquely tied to a separate set of circumstances. If Pres. Packer’s comments were a prescient warning against frivolity and miss-prioritized values, which could bring about biblically proportioned calamities, then again, how could that only apply arbitrarily to a single Ward in SLC.
The Church through President Packer’s office released a statement suggesting that the talk which has been put into circulation does not properly reflect President Packer’s comments or intentions. I guess it is up to each individual to determine what to read into this. I can’t help but notice that President Packer seems to have a track record of “having” to recant statements of his which have been “misinterpreted”. Frankly, this can only be the true area of debate. Is the talk circulated on the internet truly misquoted, or is there some reason that either President Packer, or the other General Authorities, does not want this talk part of the general Church discourse. Again, we could draw a several conclusions from here, but it is not tenable that the talk was quoted correctly but only intended for President Packers ward, unless perhaps he’s Enoch.
Cowboy,
Good comments. Let me see if I can tackle some of your concerns. First, your summary about whether Elder Packer’s comments should be heeded or not is this:
I agree with you, to a point. If Paul is talking about problems with the Corinthians, are we wise to learn from his comments to them? Of course, but we should not think that Paul, in speaking to the Corinthians, is speaking expressly to us. The Corinthians were obviously having problems in a certain area, Paul saw what was coming down the pike, and he warned them to clean up their act. But the specificity of the statements do not necessarily apply to us.
Now, let’s look at Elder Packer. If he speaks to a ward in New Jersey about the coming catastrophes and how the people there had better prepare, is it applicable to me in Utah? Perhaps, but perhaps not. I trust that Elder Packer’s remarks were tailored to his audience. I trust that he knew what the people there needed to hear, and he said it. I also trust that if he had been speaking in my ward during the same week, he may (or may not) have said the same thing. I don’t know; only the Spirit knows, and trust that Elder Packer follows that Spirit in his remarks. So, do the comments of Elder Packer have applicability to me? Sure–but only in the most general of ways, the same as listening to my brother’s stake president may be uplifting, encouraging, or comforting.
Now, if Elder Packer comes out to a ward in Missouri and says “the world as you know it will soon come to an end,” what does that mean? Does it have meaning beyond the borders of the people to whom he is talking? Does it have meaning for just the city? The county? The state?
The problem is, we don’t know. And that is where the issue of trust again comes in. Elder Packer’s talk went viral largely because people saw within it dire warnings for the future of our country. Yet, that wasn’t what Elder Packer said. And, one would think that if his words were to have a broader meaning, they would have been said in his General Conference talk the week before the talk in that ward. Applying words meant for a limited audience to a much wider audience is inappropriate, don’t you think?
So, the Church suggests (in your words) that the talk spreading around the Internet “does not properly reflect President Packer’s comments or intentions.” If his intentions were to apply to a smaller area–such as a ward–and people are applying them to a larger area–such as a country, isn’t the Church’s suggestion correct?
People passed around the talk so much because of the “Oh My Gosh!” factor, which is entirely inappropriate. It is intellectual (or, perhaps, spiritual) voyeurism, running after the titillating story while ignoring what really was applicable to the Saints as a whole, which was delivered the week before in Conference.
Just my two cents.
-Allen
Allen:
Lets consider the example going around the internet, rather than vague hypotheticals regarding NJ. President Packer is quoted to have said, following a brief diatribe on the Great Depression and The Book of Mormon Pride Cycle, that a major calamity is coming – he also alludes that we are in some stage of the alleged cycle now. Now he either said and/or intended this, or the quote does not accurately protray Pres. Packers intended meaning or sentiments. His office has claimed the latter by generally stating that the talks being circulated on the internet are incorrect – but fail to clarify the particulars. Now the logical question is, if a proclaimed Prophet/Seer/Revelator, sought an oppurtunity to address a congregation with this type of rhetoric clothed in calamitous scriptural parallel, how could that only apply to the Forrest Bend Ward? I acknowledge that some comments made some of the time may be congregation specific, but not this type of discourse. So, again – the matter really boils down to did Pres. Packer actually say these things, or not? And if the former is true, why all of the sudden take that back?
By similar logic, we can feel free to disregard 1 and 2 Corinthians on the mere grounds that we are not 1st century Corinthians.
I agree that WHAT a revelator is talking about is just as important as WHOM he or she is talking to.
I am shocked by the lack of use of our God-given intellect in the LDS community (at least on this board). Fallacies abound here! The truth is that Boyd K. Packer did give this talk and the plethora of communications with his office did not result in a single instance wherein he denied the content. Fallacy: “the talk was not meant for us and/or Packer’s not the prophet and so cannot speak for the church as a whole.” Wow, are you going to apply this same logic to the New Testament? How about book of Timothy? To Corinthians? To the Thessalonians? All of these epistles were not written to the church as a whole, but to individuals or even to single congregations. Yet, today we apply them to all of us. Saying that a great catastrophe is coming seems (yes, seems) to be an event which will affect much more than a single stake in Utah. Do we lay aside our common sense and ignore it? No, we use it, as we should with all information, as a part of our reasoning process and apply the Spirit to know the truth.