Coming Revisions To Church Curriculum

[wenglund]

A close relative of mine works in the church public relations and marketing department. He said that, starting with seminary and institute curriculum, the church will be making revisions. He said that the outright intent of these revisions is to openly and honestly address controversial subjects in Mormon history so that youth and young adults are not surprised when they come across them. He specifically mentioned polygamy and the priesthood ban.

Very wise IMHO, and shows how things are continuing to move forward.

Assuming your relative is correct, I predict the changes will only animate rather than quail the critics.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Traela]

While I knew that Brigham Young had plural wives, I was never taught that Joseph Smith had them, and was surprised when I found out. From church publications, you would assume that his only wife was Emma. Church publications don't say much, if anything, about Young's plural wives, either, but you can't live in Utah without knowing there was polygamy.

I never heard about seer stones, or about Smith's treasure hunting. I never heard about the Kirtland financial crisis. *snip*

I learned about all of the above in Seminary, in the early '80s.

Any chance the revised curriculum will restore the 60 Seminary Mastery Scriptures that were taken out in one of the previous rounds? I was rather shocked that my kids have to learn over a third fewer than I did.

[mnn727]

Ostensibly, boards like this should fill that need but as you can see, they don't because conversations can be externally controlled even to the point of steering people away from what the Church actually teaches so you never can tell if you're getting the full and complete truth.

Like someone claiming all Church publications are doctrine when they are not.

[David T]

Assuming your relative is correct, I predict the changes will only animate rather than quail the critics.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Elder Jensen went on record earlier stating the same thing, and that it is considered as part of 'The Rescue' initiative.

[cinepro]

One of my favourite articles from what I always assumed was a Church publication, the December 1978 Ensign:

Hmmm...the author of that article sounds familiar. Where have I heard his name before...?

[wenglund]

Elder Jensen went on record earlier stating the same thing, and that it is considered as part of 'The Rescue' initiative.

In case any here may not be aware of this initiative, here are links to several articles that talk about it:

http://mormon-chroni...for-rescue.html

http://mormon-chroni...culties-of.html

http://www.reuters.c...E80T1CM20120131

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited April 3, 2012 by wenglund

[Alan]

Why not?

Because he said he didn't and was consistent in this claim. I took the view some time ago that Joseph was an honest man. Therefore, if he publicly stated he had only one wife and was not involved in polygamy, that is good enough for me. I believe he was telling the truth.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

A close relative of mine works in the church public relations and marketing department. He said that, starting with seminary and institute curriculum, the church will be making revisions. He said that the outright intent of these revisions is to openly and honestly address controversial subjects in Mormon history so that youth and young adults are not surprised when they come across them. He specifically mentioned polygamy and the priesthood ban.

Very wise IMHO, and shows how things are continuing to move forward.

Good for them!

[Cobalt-70]

Was that your experience?

No. I'm not saying that I wasn't manipulated like everyone else, but I never felt betrayed, perhaps because I understand the Mormon instinct to paint over the warts.

[sweetpotatoh]

I think it is a great idea to have these things taught in Seminary. My Mother talked to me about JS's polygamy and the priesthood ban. I feel like it was a part of our heritage and everyone knew about it. LOL. Oh to be young and naive. What shocked me was an institute class I took about Joseph Smith and the instructor talking about peep stones and his belief in folk magic. That jolted me. I prayed to have a confirmation of my testimony and received one again. I didn't worry about it any more because I understood that I just didn't know everything and didn't need to. In time I would learn and come to an understanding.

I have talked to my daughters about polygamy and the ban. I also have talked to them about same sex attraction and prop 8. I don't know how parents and their children can avoid these subjects or just not be aware of them.

I was teaching a Elders Quorum one time and I mentioned that Joseph Smith was a polygamist (I thought everyone knew about it.) LOL. There were some objections and down right denials from members of the quorum. I changed the subject but before I did I recommended Rough Stone Rolling and if they have any more questions consult it or the Bishop. LOL. The Bishop is a good friend of mine and he never said anything to me about members coming to him to discuss Joseph's polygamy. Dang, plot foiled.

[Cobalt-70]

Because he said he didn't and was consistent in this claim. I took the view some time ago that Joseph was an honest man. Therefore, if he publicly stated he had only one wife and was not involved in polygamy, that is good enough for me. I believe he was telling the truth.

He said he didn't, and was consistent in his public statements. But in private, he admitted to his closest followers that he practiced polygamy. And, of course, his wives were fully aware that he practiced polygamy. If you say that Smith would never tell a lie, then you make liars out of an awful lot of faithful Mormons.

Edited April 3, 2012 by Cobalt-70

[Cobalt-70]

LoL. "and Newel asked to have his own copy, a providential request, since the first copy was destroyed."

Destroyed by Emma, who in a spate of fury threw it in the fireplace.

It wasn't really in a state of fury. According to Smith's scribe William Clayton, who recorded the original manuscript, Emma pestered Joseph about the revelation, and kept asking if she could destroy the original manuscript, with the implication that by doing so, it would be rescinded. Finally, Clayton said that Joseph relented and let her destroy the original "to get rid of her annoyance." So if Clayton was remembering it right, there was a bit of deception going on against Emma, and the destruction was a more deliberative process than Emma just getting mad and throwing it into a fire.

[Alan]

..... then you make liars out of an awful lot of faithful Mormons.

That is true, and I do think they were either mistaken or not telling the truth.

[jskains]

That is true, and I do think they were either mistaken or not telling the truth.

But again, that would require that Brigham Young, D&C 132, Temple Marriage, etc. is all a lie.

I rather think the more likely event is Joseph Smith feared backlash and kept it quiet. Otherwise we followed the wrong guy and we should be members of the RLDS/CofC group.

JMS

[Alan]

But again, that would require that Brigham Young, D&C 132, Temple Marriage, etc. is all a lie.

I rather think the more likely event is Joseph Smith feared backlash and kept it quiet. Otherwise we followed the wrong guy and we should be members of the RLDS/CofC group.

JMS

Not so. Eternal marriage has nothing to do with polygamy.

The existence of D&C 132 does not prove that Joseph was a polygamist. Just days before his death Joseph stated publicly "I had not been married scarely five minutes, and made one proclamation of the Gospel, before it was reported that I had seven wives...... What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers."

So he was either a liar or he was telling the truth. I choose to believe he was not a liar.

The problem as I see it is that we are looking at the evidence through 21st century glasses, knowing how plural marraige played out in the church in Utah. We assume that sealings equate to marriages because that is the vocabulary we use today. 37 years ago my family joined the church and after a year we went to the temple. I was sealed to my parents but have never considered that to be a marriage. When men and women are sealed together we automatically assume that is a marriage but I think in many instances in the early days of the restoration we would be wrong. I do not doubt that a number of women were sealed to Joseph. I believe there is evidence that some men were too. But these sealings were just that; and not marriages.

So Joseph was really telling the truth and so was Emma.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I was teaching a Elders Quorum one time and I mentioned that Joseph Smith was a polygamist (I thought everyone knew about it.) LOL. There were some objections and down right denials from members of the quorum.

I find this fascinating. I've lived on two continents and in five islands, and I've yet to meet a Church member who would make such a denial. I believe you, but I find the whole thing odd.

[HiJolly]

Happened to me 3 years ago when I was teaching D&C/Church History in Gospel Doctrine class, here in Utah. Had a fellow come up afterward and say "I had never heard that Joseph practiced polygamy". To which I replied "He kept it very quiet"

HJ

[Libs]

I don't find it odd, at all. It's not really discussed in Gospel Doctrine that often.

[blackstrap]

We also dance around(ignore) many interesting passages in the Old and New Testament classes .I suppose it's a function of having to teach to people that are relatively new to the gospel,but after 40 years I often get a 'deja vu' feeling.

[Libs]

but after 40 years I often get a 'deja vu' feeling.

I'll bet.

I was only active in the church six years. I was a convert. I, honestly, don't remember a discussion about Joseph's wives, ever...and, definitely, didn't know how many or their ages...or that some were already married. I think the Church could do a little better job informing (especially new converts) about that kind of information. I would have rather been exposed at church, first. The critics had a hay day with me, sorry to say.

Edited April 4, 2012 by Libs

[jskains]

Not so. Eternal marriage has nothing to do with polygamy.

The existence of D&C 132 does not prove that Joseph was a polygamist. Just days before his death Joseph stated publicly "I had not been married scarely five minutes, and made one proclamation of the Gospel, before it was reported that I had seven wives...... What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers."

So he was either a liar or he was telling the truth. I choose to believe he was not a liar.

The problem as I see it is that we are looking at the evidence through 21st century glasses, knowing how plural marraige played out in the church in Utah. We assume that sealings equate to marriages because that is the vocabulary we use today. 37 years ago my family joined the church and after a year we went to the temple. I was sealed to my parents but have never considered that to be a marriage. When men and women are sealed together we automatically assume that is a marriage but I think in many instances in the early days of the restoration we would be wrong. I do not doubt that a number of women were sealed to Joseph. I believe there is evidence that some men were too. But these sealings were just that; and not marriages.

So Joseph was really telling the truth and so was Emma.

Have you read 132?

[sweetpotatoh]

I find this fascinating. I've lived on two continents and in five islands, and I've yet to meet a Church member who would make such a denial. I believe you, but I find the whole thing odd.

I can give you more details if you like. This was in Utah. My wife, who grew up in Utah County was unfamiliar with his polygamy unti she read R.S.R. It was an eye opener for her.

[Thinking]

The Church is in a tough spot. Regardless of the course it chooses to deal with the information which is coming out, the information is not faith promoting.

[Pahoran]

The Church is in a tough spot. Regardless of the course it chooses to deal with the information which is coming out, the information is not faith promoting.

Thank you for your expression of ideological loyalty. The reality is that, in its proper context, the truth about the Church of Jesus Christ is always "faith promoting."

Regards,

Pahoran

[Eldwynn]

I find it incredibly interesting that TBM's aren't actively correcting Allan in his statements that Joseph Smith was not a polygamist.