Thoughts On Church History, Theology, And Faith Crisis

[Calm]

the Neal A. Maxwell Institute has uploaded more full books than are contained in my entire ward library.

Technically the ward library is only supposed to carry the few books published by Church Distribution (see ward librarian protocols). Frustrating for those of us who would love to be able to share one's own book wealth as well as others, but having experienced once too often a certain expectation that everything in a church bookstore (used to work in one and it wasn't even Deseretbook) is somehow church approved, I can understand the reluctance.

[Calm]

I made the same suggestion a couple of threads ago and got no response. The wheel goes round and round.

I am not making a suggestion, I am asking if he has done this....and I wouldn't mind knowing if he has not, then why not. Edited April 19, 2012 by calmoriah

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

Technically the ward library is only supposed to carry the few books published by Church Distribution (see ward librarian protocols). Frustrating for those of us who would love to be able to share one's own book wealth as well as others, but having experienced once too often a certain expectation that everything in a church bookstore (used to work in one and it wasn't even Deseretbook) is somehow church approved, I can understand the reluctance.

Oh, totally. Definitely not a knock on ward libraries - it's just so exciting how much stuff is available in alternative places.

[Calm]

Oh, totally. Definitely not a knock on ward libraries - it's just so exciting how much stuff is available in alternative places.

Sorry, it's just my obsessive ward librarian mode...there are still some libraries that maintain a book section of nonCD books, my former Stake Center did for one. As much as I love the idea, I think they need to respect the Church's leadership instructions in this....so I tend to speak up when I think someone hasn't been reading the instructions as carefully as they should....not that it would be you, but perhaps someone in your ward you might give this info.

However, if this is not an issue at your local ward....just ignore everything I've said in the past two posts.

Edited April 19, 2012 by calmoriah

[shalamabobbi]

Kieth Merrill was in my ward when I joined the church. When he was approached by the church for a particular job there was a committee that was going to oversee the film. Keith told them he had to have complete artistic license and control or he wasn't interested and to find someone else to do it. He ended up doing it.

Also the artist Arnold Friberg was leaned upon by some leader(s) not to include horses in his depictions of BoM scenes because of the controversy on the matter but he did so anyhow because of his faith in the BoM. (2nd hand relation from a tour guide at the new conference center)

Anyhow, 'don't know how the situation may have/(have not) changed to the present, but this illustrates some of the issues surrounding "church control".

Edited April 19, 2012 by shalamabobbi

[Log]

Technically the ward library is only supposed to carry the few books published by Church Distribution (see ward librarian protocols).

Not exactly true, if I recall the protocols correctly. I remember finding that carrying outside books is unmentioned. My library has accrued a lot of outside material from donations.

Edited April 19, 2012 by Log

[Calm]

Not exactly true, if I recall the protocols correctly. I remember finding that carrying outside books is unmentioned. My library has accrued a lot of outside material from donations.

In this case, your memory is wrong.

Answer: Commercially produced books and materials, even if authored or created by Church members, are not to be included in the library. Only books and audiovisual materials produced and distributed by the Church may be stored in and circulated from the meetinghouse library.

http://www.lds.org/service/serving-in-the-church/sunday-school/leader-resources/meetinghouse-library-questions?lang=eng

edited to show the updated version

Edited April 19, 2012 by calmoriah

[DBMormon]

Have you written to the Curriculum department suggesting improvements?

I wrote a member of the 12. They passed on my letter along with their love to Elder Jensen who contacted me and shared his empathy and along with his recent taped comments shared similar feelings. I then wrote Elder Jensen another letter by email in which he assured me it was passed onto the curriculum department.

[DBMormon]

I believe that you posted something like this previously and got various responses. And the hamster wheel goes round and round. I commented on the link that you supplied from the Mormon Chronical about Jensen recogizes the problem and will attempt to do something about it. But....you don't recognize that at all. You just ignore it and repeat your problems. I don't know what more one can do for you. You seem embedded in your own mental perception of the lds church. And what is negative? I see no negatives in the history but I do see some human imperfections and that is the point: it is in the eye of the beholder.

It oesn't go around and around.... this post is about me resolving my issues not you feeling validated in what you share. I feel today I am beggininning to see some things that I will have to think about. I agree ELder Jensen indicates the church is making efforts to make this better but that could be years, meanwhile here am I... right now... needing resolution... needing to work through things. Patience is not one of my virtues.

Edited April 19, 2012 by reelmormon

[Log]

If it is not minded, I'd like to condense Reelmormon's explanation of himself a bit. I've taken the liberty of rearranging and editing it a bit.

I also had a very spirtual experience in praying about the Book of Mormon. In short it was a clear message that everything that I was being taught was true...all of it. Yet now knowing some of it is not true or at least not complete it on some level shakes that answer.

I am the one in my ward others point people to who have questions on the surface issues.

I had always taken on the challenge of finding out everything I could on both sides of the isle and sorting it out as I always felt the truth would rise to the surface. That worked almost universally until about 4-5 years ago when this underlying issue took on more of an awareness in my conscious.

I had been taught false concepts. I then perpetuated these false teachings and no-one ever corrected me[,] leading me to assume that all the members around thought these same things.... heck that is where I got them from, in lessons, or from Missionaries who taught me, or from my in laws who are longtime members.

Because some critics point out personal harmful related experiences of LDS leaders it makes me have a spot in my concious where I am skeptical of their ability to be open with me.

So as I have increased my own knowledge and understanding I have grown skeptical of both the critic who twists and turns every sentence into anything that will meet his means to the end of mormonism as well as the apoligetic who reaches so far for a satisfactory answer that he shares a false answer that sounds good.

So, the issue is close to his heart, and the hamster wheel ought to not be referenced again, for in no circumstance is it helpful.

[Log]

In this case, your memory is wrong.

http://www.lds.org/s...stions?lang=eng

edited to show the updated version

Ahh. Ok, what I was shown did not say that; I guess it's housecleaning time!

In fact, all I was shown was this: http://www.lds.org/h...l?lang=eng#12.6 (in a paper format, to my recollection lacking the citation to the policies you link to).

So, my memory is NOT wrong! Nyah.

Edited April 19, 2012 by Log

[DBMormon]

I am not making a suggestion, I am asking if he has done this....and I wouldn't mind knowing if he has not, then why not.

I am hesitant to share info on what I have done in writing others only because I see level of confidentiality with it. But if you think I would get a response, I might consider writing the curriculum department and asking why certain things are not included. The answer might be intriguing

[Calm]

The handbook itself has been abbreviated significantly, you must check online in the Sunday School section I linked to above to get more details on material protocol. Makes sense if they intend to update and expand materials, especially if they want to encourage teachers (and therefore librarians) to make better use of what is available online.

[Log]

Should I just trash the books?

[DBMormon]

I made the same suggestion a couple of threads ago and got no response. The wheel goes round and round.

Each time I go back there are a dozen new posts I am trying to reply as much as my time allows. Please be more understanding. For all of you, if there is a specific question you want answered and I don't seem to be doing so, send me a PM and I will post the question and answer in this forum if you want. I am really not trying to avoid questions.... imagine being one dealing with dozens of people.... Thanks

[Calm]

I am hesitant to share info on what I have done in writing others only because I see level of confidentiality with it. But if you think I would get a response, I might consider writing the curriculum department and asking why certain things are not included. The answer might be intriguing

I am not suggesting you ask them why something isn't included.

I was asking if you sent in suggestions to be included. In the front of each manual is a request for feedback and on each (I believe) webpage is a feedback button. I have a hard time understanding anyone who states they have studied the materials available from the Church sufficiently enough to criticize them for what they do or do not include not being aware of this process being available to them, but in my experience many have not only never taken advantage of this even while spending hours and hours of making criticisms and suggestions of random websites that are not part of the Church's organization, but are not even aware of the possibility.

As I said before, I don't see change as a spectator sport and because of this I see people who put significant energy into voicing complaints but do nothing about it that can effectively effect change as rather hypocritical.

You have made at least the one attempt you detailed for us so I would not apply that judgment to you, but I would still encourage you to help out those who are creating the curriculum if you care about the end result by offering suggestions.

I have done so a number of times and have always received a response, though sometimes it is just a recognition. Other times it got me involved in surveys on how to improve things.

[DBMormon]

I am hesitant to share info on what I have done in writing others only because I see level of confidentiality with it. But if you think I would get a response, I might consider writing the curriculum department and asking why certain things are not included. The answer might be intriguing

With that though I also realise the folks who made the decisions that bother me are likely long gone by now. So Person B would answer for Person A's decision. so not a perfect solution

[wenglund]

How am I different -

First I don't know why I can't let things go...... It is part of my mental makeup.... whenever I hear something on tv that is intriging or discover something neat I run off and get books and other media resources and find out all I can.

because if my list of possible factors to how I got to where I got, I have assumed that the Lord's True and Living Church would have the following. Please note I am trying to better see this in another paradigm but this it what I work in. I am not sure I can answer the first question beyond things I have rehashed but will try

1.) the difference between me and them is I have an expectation that the Lord's church will set a completely different standard then other faiths. That they will be willing to be a complete open book tell their full story out in the open where all members know the troubling areas and then get to make spiritual decisions about whether they will join or continue in the faith having as much information as the church has. Then having all the info ( I realize we never will have all the info but there is value in the attempt I believe) they can decide to go on faith.

2.) along with that I felt the church told me all the exciting faith promoting side of their story. I was excited and saw the church as this complete work of God and dismissing the critics as liars and joined once I had God's answer. Then finding out that all the negative information was withheld from me by the church caused a feeling of betrayal. I felt like my trust was broken on some level. Like they owed it to me if they had truth and nothing to hide to give it all to me and let me decide.

Not sure where else to take it.

I believe they either have to have a "their side of the Story" or admit someone messed up and try to correct it.

Excellent. This gives me a sense for where you are coming from.

Okay, let's re-identify the problem and look at possible solutions. The problem in general is you have had issues with church history that have come up periodically during your membership, and you personally need to have those issues completely resolved before you can move on.

In looking at possible solutions it would be wise to ask who may best solve your problem, and what is the best means for you to gain complete resolution?

To answer these questions, it may help to use a specific example. Take for instance you having read Fawn Brodie's book, which apparently raised a number of challenges in your mind. At the time, the solution you came up with was to personally research and work things through to your satisfaction. Evidently, this solution worked for you then. So, at the very least, it was a workable solution. Right? However, you now question whether it was the best solution, and you seem to be of the mind that the Church might have better solved your personal problem than you or some other alternative. What reasons can you give to argue that the Church would have been the best solution for completely resolving your personal issue with Brodie's book?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited April 19, 2012 by wenglund

[Calm]

Should I just trash the books?

Give them away, though if there have been recent donations you may want to make an announcement in the bulletin or ward email/newsletter for those who have donated them to come pick them up if they want them back. When you tell them about the rules, you don't have to tell them they've actually been in force probably for at least 20 years (I've been doing ward library since 94/5 off and on and the notebook I had containing the official handout was several years old at that time).

Though there are some that may not be taken home that you may have to grit your teeth and toss if your local library or thrift store doesn't take donations for book sales or you don't think it's appropriate to give them (we have a few way out of date books left that I just can't bring myself to throw away, I need to take them down to one of the local bookstore that does older books...some I took home just because they were so amusing...from the late 1800s, early 1900s, our ward building is almost a hundred years old...and some of the books may be from the previous incarnation that burnt down). I toss one rather racist book, felt it wasn't something that really was needed by anyone (wasn't an LDS book, just a general pseudophilosophical tome that came across as purely written to inflate the ego of its author).

There are also procedures for discarding/donating library materials, just check the Sunday School section for Meetinghouse libraries....just don't do what one of our librarians from my old ward did and that was attempt to toss all pictures not in the current catalogue and at that time that meant only pictures that were being used for that year's curriculum...which meant we lost some pictures needed for other years...I can laugh now I am in another ward (I don't know if this is a problem with the online one, will have to check, probably not). I highly doubt that you would make that mistake...I am just sharing what may be seen as an amusing or very frustrating anecdote depending on if you've experience something along those lines or not, some people do take instructions extremely literal though without taking into account the greater context.

You are supposed to get rid of older magazines as well, can't remember the exact instructions, think it's two years for everything but conference Ensigns but we keep five years just because we have the room (not that anyone asks for them now with them being online). Used to get two copies as well, one to keep and one to lend out, now we just get one, don't know if that is in line with the instructions now or not...but since no one borrows it, I'm not going to worry about it.

Reminds me, got to go get some clipboards...use to be the remotes that would always walk, but I got industrial strength velcro from Walmart and made a place for them to attach to the machine they go with and haven't had to worry about them for five years. I think I will start putting florescent tape or something on the clipboards to remind people to bring them back, big black marking isn't working.

Edited April 19, 2012 by calmoriah

[why me]

It oesn't go around and around.... this post is about me resolving my issues not you feeling validated in what you share. I feel today I am beggininning to see some things that I will have to think about. I agree ELder Jensen indicates the church is making efforts to make this better but that could be years, meanwhile here am I... right now... needing resolution... needing to work through things. Patience is not one of my virtues.

I think that people are helping you to try to resolve your issues. Heck, I have tried to help you. I even gave you several quotations about mercy to counter your quotations from an antimormon site. You do realize that it does take people's time to answer your questions. I have no idea just how long it will take for Jensen's idea to put into effect and neither do you. He answered your letter if I understood correctly. That's a positive. I am afraid that nothing happens in a minute or even in a day. Some things take time. If you can't wait...well...I have no idea how you will get resolution. But one thing that I do know...reading antimormon sites will not resolve your issues but reading them will convince you that the church is a fake and a fraud and out you may go. That is why the sites exist.

[CV75]

Excellent. This gives me a sense for where you are coming from.

Okay, let's re-identify the problem and look at possible solutions. The problem in general is you have had issues with church history that have come up periodically during your membership, and you personally need to have those issues completely resolved before you can move on.

reel and wade, if I am butting (or if this has already been covered) in please say so and I will stop.

reel, my take on your two points;

The Church’s proselytizing effort is unique in that it is deemed correct only when accomplished by the Spirit. This is done by presenting the essential spiritual truths of the Gospel so that the Holy Ghost can bear witness to the hearer. This leaves out anything that might invite a spirit or reaction of enmity or contention (depending on the time and culture) so that the Spirit might be unrestrained. This would include such things as history and accusations that highlight transgressions, mistakes and oddities (real, imagined, controvertible, etc.). The Lord atoned for the real ones so they are irrelevant to another person’s need for His atonement.

The “troubling areas” are not spiritual in nature, so “spiritual decisions” about them cannot be made. Troubling areas are made so and defined as such by us, by the light of our own intellect and emotions; “spiritual decisions” are made by the light of our own spirit receiving greater light from the Holy Spirit. Intellect and emotions often detract from this spiritual process.

The Church owes all mankind the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Its role in conveying information in other areas such as its history has to be guided by the same Spirit. So it may “fall short” of some intellectual and emotional expectations and come across as withholding, hiding or betraying the truth. But the Church cannot proactively present that which cannot be confirmed by the Spirit. It takes a threshold level of wickedness or faithlessness in the world before its leaders are moved upon by the Spirit to respond to informational situations that are based on that which cannot be confirmed by the Spirit, and in a way that will be confirmed by and help people experience the Spirit.

[wenglund]

reel and wade, if I am butting (or if this has already been covered) in please say so and I will stop.

reel, my take on your two points;

The Church’s proselytizing effort is unique in that it is deemed correct only when accomplished by the Spirit. This is done by presenting the essential spiritual truths of the Gospel so that the Holy Ghost can bear witness to the hearer. This leaves out anything that might invite a spirit or reaction of enmity or contention (depending on the time and culture) so that the Spirit might be unrestrained. This would include such things as history and accusations that highlight transgressions, mistakes and oddities (real, imagined, controvertible, etc.). The Lord atoned for the real ones so they are irrelevant to another person’s need for His atonement.

The “troubling areas” are not spiritual in nature, so “spiritual decisions” about them cannot be made. Troubling areas are made so and defined as such by us, by the light of our own intellect and emotions; “spiritual decisions” are made by the light of our own spirit receiving greater light from the Holy Spirit. Intellect and emotions often detract from this spiritual process.

The Church owes all mankind the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Its role in conveying information in other areas such as its history has to be guided by the same Spirit. So it may “fall short” of some intellectual and emotional expectations and come across as withholding, hiding or betraying the truth. But the Church cannot proactively present that which cannot be confirmed by the Spirit. It takes a threshold level of wickedness or faithlessness in the world before its leaders are moved upon by the Spirit to respond to informational situations that are based on that which cannot be confirmed by the Spirit, and in a way that will be confirmed by and help people experience the Spirit.

Excellent point. Thanks for sharing. -Wade Englund-

[Buzzard]

Since the snarkiness reached a fever pitch yesterday, I went back and reread this thread from the first post. A short synopsis:

-Reelmormon posts some questions. The real heart of the matter seems to be that he thinks the church hides stuff. (My conclusion, accuracy not guaranteed)

-Several members respond, reel responds back. At first the answers are straightforward. Some more detailed than others. Reel doesn't seem satisfied, comes back with a mixture of the original questions and objections to the answers. In a couple of posts, Reel mentions that he has corresponded in the past with FAIR, Hugh Nibley, and Dan Peterson, among others on what I assume were similar questions.

-Cycle repeats itself several times. Reel seems to be frustrated at responses, responders start to get more than a little short.

-Reel responds with what turns out to be a cut-and-paste from some anti- websites. Several posters, myself included, come to the conclusion that Reel is nothing more than an anti- troll, and pile on. Log, being more charitable than most, upbraids a couple of us.

-Reel, to a certain extent, bares his soul. Talks about what makes him tick, and goes into more detail about why these issues are vexing him. Other posters come back with somewhat more understanding responses.

-Various tangents come and go throughout the thread, the latest being one on church libraries.

-Just this morning, Reel tells us that he has had correspondence with General Authorities over these issues.

-The saga continues.

So, here are my PERSONAL conclusions. Again, accuracy is not guaranteed, and YMMV:

-Reel, like you said, your real issue is that you feel betrayed by discovering that some of the less salubrious twists and turns of church history are not laid before the membership. My response would be:What do you want the church to say? Should the missionaries knock on doors and ask if people want to hear about JS's polygamous wives? That's obviously silly. Of course the church is going to put it's best foot forward. Seer stones and polyandry and what a member of the 70 (or an apostle) said in 1955 that sounds at odds with the way doctrine is presented today are interesting, but are not the heart of the gospel. What is critical are The Plan of Salvation, the atonement, and the restoration of the gospel . Converts are asked to pray about the Book of Mormon. Would you really want them to pray about some of the issues you brought up? Really?? The information is out there for those hwo are curious, and not just from anti- sources, but since most members are not troubled by it, why toss it on their front doorsteps?

-I humble submit that full satisfaction of Reel's concerns are not available, because sometimes there just is not a perfect answer. It seems like Reel want's every jot and tittle explained to HIS satisfaction. I think it's safe to say that is not because he is hostile, but it does seem to be his particular personality quirk. Quirks are OK, heaven knows I have some. But no matter how cogent and complete the answers, there will always be some niggling part of the answer that doesn't meet his needs. That's not our fault, in a sense it might not be his fault, either. I do appreciate that he has said that at least some of our ruminations have helped him somewhat. But if he is looking for perfect answers, he will be looking for a long time.

-Reel asked, after the dustup over his cut-and-paste, if it mattered where he got the quotes. I think it does. It's like drinking from a poison well. Anti- websites are not a way to get the other side of the story. By and large, they distort, they only present things in the worst possible way, dare I say, the out and out lie. If one wants both sides, go to the source documents, like the JS papers. Those are available as well, and you can make your own judgement, not have the lies of the anti- sites pushed down your gullet.

-A personal note. I'm not a historian. I'm just an ordinary member. I enjoy reading about church history, but it is not why I am a member. If I may be allowed a little soul baring myself, I have come to realize how much the Plan of Salvation is central two our lives through two events-losing my son a few years back made me realize just how important-and completly true-the doctrine of eternal families is. The second event was the recurrence of my cancer. I'm not going anywhere for a year or two or maybe three, but I'm not going to see my retirement years. Talk about something that brings what is important into focus, that will do the trick. I may hang around a post on this and a couple of other internet forums, but that's maily for entertainment purposes. It doesn't mean I don't mean what I say, but it does mean that what takes place on the internet is really a side show compared to what goes on in our heart during those times that it's just you and God. I hope for some more time to knock off some remaining rough edges, but that's not up to me. Anyway, I'm starting to ramble, so that's enough about that.

[DBMormon]

Take for instance you having read Fawn Brodie's book, which apparently raised a number of challenges in your mind. At the time, the solution you came up with was to personally research and work things through to your satisfaction. Evidently, this solution worked for you then. So, at the very least, it was a workable solution. Right?

it was workable at the time. I was 17 and read through most of the book. While I could not give you specific things brought up I remember specifically reading nibley's no mam that not history. I remember Nibley finding many of the "evidences" Brodie used were out of context and misused. specifics I do not recall. but yes it resolved that issue. From there I found FAIR, FARMS, SHIELDS and other LDS apoligetic sites and tried to soak in as much as possible.

However, you now question whether it was the best solution, and you seem to be of the mind that the Church might have better solved your personal problem than you or some other alternative. What reasons can you give to argue that the Church would have been the best solution for completely resolving your personal issue with Brodie's book?

Different problem - to me not the same - the superfiscial surface issues of why did Joseph treasure hunt? why did he attempt to translate the kinderhook plates? why were african americans not allowed to have the PH, why did Brigham Young teach Adam God? those issues I was easily able to work out with FAIR, FARMS, SHIELDS and other LDS apoligetic sites as to a thorough explantion of these events. what I feel the church better solves is putting more of these trouble areas into the material. They don't have to give a thorough answer to the above questions. Only mention it in passing so that all memebrs are aware of what the kinderhook plates are, that prophets sometimes make mistakes on doctrine when sharing their opinion, so that as a member I at least am confident that the church while perhaps not taking the time or space to thoroughly explain every trouble at least seem confident in having every member be aware of these things.

ex: say in the spots where we discuss Jospeh's leg surgery we also in one paragraph mention Joseph found a seer stone and seemed to have a gift of finding lost things for his neighbors and the seer stone was used along with the Urim and Thummim in translating. That is no different then putting it in the ensign once every decade except it reaches more people.

also part of my issue as I am seeing it now is that while I encounter these problems multiple times. they each only occured once in time as an event and the church has addressed them once as an event. For instance a letter from the first presidency on evolution or Bruce McConkie standing up and stating for us to ignore he ever said or what other said on African Americans and PH. Meanwhile the next generation like me comes along and we envounter the problem over and over and yet the solution was only presented once, is harder to find, and within church context in rarely brought up again.

Edited April 19, 2012 by reelmormon

[DBMormon]

reel and wade, if I am butting (or if this has already been covered) in please say so and I will stop.

reel, my take on your two points;

The Church’s proselytizing effort is unique in that it is deemed correct only when accomplished by the Spirit. This is done by presenting the essential spiritual truths of the Gospel so that the Holy Ghost can bear witness to the hearer. This leaves out anything that might invite a spirit or reaction of enmity or contention (depending on the time and culture) so that the Spirit might be unrestrained. This would include such things as history and accusations that highlight transgressions, mistakes and oddities (real, imagined, controvertible, etc.). The Lord atoned for the real ones so they are irrelevant to another person’s need for His atonement.

The “troubling areas” are not spiritual in nature, so “spiritual decisions” about them cannot be made. Troubling areas are made so and defined as such by us, by the light of our own intellect and emotions; “spiritual decisions” are made by the light of our own spirit receiving greater light from the Holy Spirit. Intellect and emotions often detract from this spiritual process.

The Church owes all mankind the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Its role in conveying information in other areas such as its history has to be guided by the same Spirit. So it may “fall short” of some intellectual and emotional expectations and come across as withholding, hiding or betraying the truth. But the Church cannot proactively present that which cannot be confirmed by the Spirit. It takes a threshold level of wickedness or faithlessness in the world before its leaders are moved upon by the Spirit to respond to informational situations that are based on that which cannot be confirmed by the Spirit, and in a way that will be confirmed by and help people experience the Spirit.

Thank you