Elder Christofferson Speaks to our Self Responsibility

Elder Christofferson has given thirteen talks since being called to the Quorum of the Twelve apostles in 2008, and of those thirteen, eight present his main topics of the atonement and our personal responsibility to be the best we can. Born Again -April 2008, Moral Discipline -Oct 2009, Reflections on a Consecrated Life -Oct 2010, “As Many as I Love, I Rebuke and Chasten” -April 2011, The Doctrine of Christ  -April 2012, Brethren, We Have Work to Do -Oct 2012,  Redemption -April 2013, The Resurrection of Jesus Christ -April 2014. For my analysis I briefly reviewed through his previous talks while dissecting his most recent talk in Oct 2014 titled Free Forever, to Act for Themselves

Elder Christofferson spoke after the first General Conference address given in the speakers native tongue, by Elder Wong in Cantonese. Fluent in spanish, Elder Christofferson began with a phrase in spanish. This is to no surprise recognizing that he served his young mission to Argentina and has served as President of the Mexico South Area residing in Mexico City. 

He proceeded to share his main idea by quoting from William Shakespeares play “Life of King Henry the 5th”. He illustrates from this play that we all need to take personal responsibility. Going back to the history of his talks he emphasizes that the Atonement of Christ is their for our aide, but in other talks he stresses that it is only there if we repent and do what we need to on our end.  By opening his talk with a spanish phrase then moving into examples from Shakespeare it created an ethos of his intelligence and intellect. 

Tone and voice make Elder Christofferson an interesting speaker to listen to. While he quotes form various sources in his talks, you may wonder how original he is in his material. Where is the brilliance and genius? Yet, his tone and voice convey a  sense of intelligence and brilliance. When I hear him speak I personally feel intelligent and able to comprehend simple and complex things. His comparisons coupled with his voice take what was once simple turning it into a complex and deep thought urging you to further ponder and contemplate the main idea. 

A Contrast in the Context of Speeches by Elder Robert D. Hales

When Elder Hales got up and began to his talk "Eternal Life-to Know Our Heavenly and His Son Jesus Christ" (October 2014) I was excited because I knew his health has been poor the last several conferences. The general conferences of the LDS church are given in an auditorium that seats thousands of people, and are televised internationally, so it isn't always apparent, but sometimes speakers who are in poor health will sit while they give their address.  Elder Hales sat while he spoke, rather than standing, and his voice was feeble, but he did seem to be in better shape than I remembered and he still spoke with conviction. It was quite a contrast to see him standing erect 33 years prior, when he powerfully and directly delivered his address "Examples from the Life of a Prophet" (October 1981).

He was not a member of the quorum of the twelve apostles when he gave his first address, and now he is: this changed his delivery approach. In 1981, his address "Examples from the Life of a Prophet" used stories from the current prophet's life (President Kimball). Elder Hales leaned on President Kimball's established ethos, while building his own by illustrating the times he had worked in concert with this leader of the church. He had clearly served in the church extensively by this time, in fact he had been a mission president, bishop, high counselor, branch president, and a member of the stake presidency, along with having served in the seventy for 6 years. Despite this, his audience was likely unaware of his background. This contrasts sharply with his approach 33 years later, now a seasoned member of the twelve, and much older than most of his audience. In his address on sunday, he told a story of looking up to into the starts, pondering on the depths of the universe. This helped him relate to his audience, as they have often considered the existence and/or role of God in their lives, and many may not have realized that a member of the twelve would share these common experiences with them.

In his address this past weekend, it was interesting that Elder Hales taught from the scriptures almost exclusively for several minutes at a time. In a different context, this would be similar to someone parsing different court rulings into a legal opinion, or using sections of the accounting codifications to prescribe a proper accounting treatment. Any of the aforementioned approaches could seem odd, unless a clear link between each reference was made. I was interested to see if this style was a common thread in his addresses, but when I listened to Elder Hales talk from 1981, I noticed that it was not. I did, however, find a common theme, that of the testimony of prophets. In '81, the testimony was of a living prophet, and was shared through experiences, while this past sunday it was the written testimony prophets of old. It was enlightening to see the common theme delivered with different approaches by the same speaker, a third of a century apart.

You Don't Know Me, Don't Pretend That You Know Me

Assigned Section:
Helaman 13 -> 3 Nephi 4

Sections of Spoken Word:
Helaman chapters 13, 14, 15 (sermon)
Helaman 16:16 (dialogue amongst themselves)
Helaman 16:18-21 (dialogue amongst themselves)
3 Nephi 1:13-14 (dialogue from the Lord to Nephi)
3 Nephi 3:20-21 (dialogue between Gidgiddoni and the people)
3 Nephi 4:29-32 (the people crying out)

Selected Section:
Helaman 13:24-29

I chose this section specifically, as I noticed Samuel using a certain rhetorical technique that I've seen used before but thought would be interesting to analyze.

Throughout this short section, Samuel uses various "quotes" that suggest what the people may or may not say in certain situations. For example: "When ye talk, ye say, 'If our days had been in the days of our fathers of old, we would not have slain the prophets.'" In essence, "if someone says this, you will say this." He uses these hypothetical phrases to--in my estimation--appeal to the pathos, logos, and ethos of his audience, the wicked Nephites.

Sharing these little hypotheticals appeals to their ethos by showing the people that he has a greater knowledge of them than they might think. By directly pointing out things they've said or could have said he proves that he knows his audience and is ready to address them. I can only imagine some of the Nephites thinking, "oh boy I heard Craig saying that just the other day..." or "oh no he must've heard me saying that just the other day."

More obviously, these hypotheticals appeal to their pathos as the words strike the people right in their hearts. "You will say that he is a false prophet, and that he is a sinner, and of the devil, because he testifieth that your deeds are evil." He's essentially telling them that even if they did hear the word of God that they would deny it on account of their hypocrisy and evil.

Lastly, I feel that this technique might appeal to the logos of the audience, by providing them with some vague "examples" of things that have been said by them, assuming they're accurate statements.

By this account, Samuel the Lamanite was an expert speaker, which seems appropriate considering he had to talk on top of a wall to a large population of wicked, prideful people.

"Oh good"

If I was asked to give one word describing Elder Holland it would easily be, blunt. No sugar frosting, no cherry on top, not the slightest been of gooey, cheesy, fluff that we so often want to hear in talks. He says it plain and simple. Because of that he is easily one of the most popular speakers in the Mormon world.

Marion G Romney said “I always know when I am speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost because I always learn something from what I've said" This is something I believe Elder Holland would agree with. He starts out simply, asking the audience to be respectful, something not often said across the pulpit. By doing this he is setting a serious tone and establishing his Ethos for the whole rest of the meeting, not just his talk. He then continues to a topic that we all know to be a serious one, reinforcing the tone he previously set.

Elder Holland mainly uses Logos throughout this entire talk, speaking of doctrine, telling stories and research studies all about the seriousness of human intimacy. But he doesn't only use logos. At one specific point he really hit me hard, pulling out the Pathos in his argument. He is talking about the seriousness of purity and how it is the worst sin other than murder. He then compares sexual transgression to the taking of a life and how in control we all are when it comes to taking care of other people's lives. We don't walk up to someone and put a gun to their head and pull the trigger hoping the gun won't go off and think;
"Oh good, I didn't go all the way"
To me, this is the point where his Ethos is the strongest. This, I believe, would be one of those "inspired one liners" that Neal A. Maxwell was talking about.

Through his use of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos Elder Holland is one of the most straight forward and powerful speakers out there, and that is definitely an example of that.