NOM

All this "change" has me thinking about a saying that was so true it was used in a Star Trek movie:

"Only Nixon can go to China"

From Wikipedia: "Nixon, having had an undisputed reputation of being a staunch anti-Communist; was largely immune to any criticism of being "soft on Communism" by figures on the right of American politics. The phrase originated prior to Nixon's actual visit to China."

If Uchtdorf is the point man for gender redefinition for the Church he's just "a liberal softy, a victim of liberal bias, a social justice warrior on a tear".

If Oaks leads the redefinition of gender...well...he's Nixon going to China, it would be hard to doubt him because of his abject dislike of gender identification outside the traditional.

Possible. Not very likely, but possible.

Hope this isn't like Nixon vomiting at the luncheon with Mao Zedong.

100% agree. He would drag the hardliners into line.

You may be onto something here. I have devout, conservative Catholic friends that don't like Pope Francis for being a big liberal. They liked Benedict XVI and his conservative leanings. If Benedict had been a staunch conservative, but had let some key concession be allowed, no one would have doubted his basic, hardline beliefs. He could have allowed for a limited run of married priests, for example, even as he remained fixed on refusing to normalize homosexuality.

Oaks and Holland and Bednar are the likely next three prophets. Perhaps they have been quietly discussing some big change that they can make even though they are known to be conservative. Nixon going to China was a transformative time in American history. Maybe the LDS church needs a similarly transformative change.