Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Serious Question: Has the Church Ever Admitted to Making a Mistake?


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

As I've been taking a break from MD&D this past week, laying on a Mexican beach, a random thought entered my mind that I seriously couldn't answer. So I kindly ask it here.   Has the LDS Church ever admitted to making a mistake or error?

 I know the church doesn't apologize but certainly mistakes have been made over the years that they must regret or there have been errors in judgement over the years or there have been positions taken by the church and its various organizations that have caused unintended injury, harm or caused damaged to its members due to its policies or made by the people who have been called to positions of authority...and yet I could not think of a single example of the church ever taking responsibility, expressing regret and admitting that mistakes were made.

Can you?  If you can please share, if no. Why not?  Other faith traditions have admited making mistakes and regret why not the LDS Church?

IMO, the church has never fully admitted to making mistakes; and I don't think it will in the near future, because it doesn't give apologies and really doesn't take the first step to fully acknowledge its past mistakes.  For example:

"LDS apostle Dallin H. Oaks set off a global chain reaction among Mormons this week, when he said he wasn't sure apologizing for the faith's past rhetoric on homosexuality would be advisable.
"I know that the history of the church is not to seek apologies or to give them," Oaks said in an interview Tuesday. "We sometimes look back on issues and say, 'Maybe that was counterproductive for what we wish to achieve,' but we look forward and not backward."
The church doesn't "seek apologies," he said, "and we don't give them."

http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/2122123-155/no-apology-really-mormons-question-apostle

If you made a mistake, isn't the correct step in the repentance process to "make restitution?"  

For example,  the Gospel Principles chapter on repentance states the following:

"We Must Make Restitution

Part of repentance is to make restitution. This means that as much as possible we must make right any wrong that we have done. For example, a thief should give back what he has stolen. A liar should make the truth known. A gossip who has slandered the character of a person should work to restore the good name of the person he has harmed. As we do these things, God will not mention our sins to us when we are judged."  

It's almost disheartening when people bring up the church's essay essay on blacks and the priesthood as an example of the church fully admitting its mistakes.  Banning an entire race for almost 150 years and calling it just a "theory" -- when in my opinion -- it was doctrine, is, in many ways contrary to making any kind of restitution.  One essay calling the ban a theory is restitution for 150 years of racism in which blacks couldn't enjoy the fruits of the temple or receive the priesthood?  How has the church made restitution for the following?

- The Mountain Meadows Massacre
- Banning blacks from the priesthood and temple for ~150 years
- Telling numerous groups of people throughout the world that they are "Lamanite descendants" when, in fact, they are not
- Polygamy/Polyandry
- And the list goes on...

I understand that the church always wants to paint its past and its leaders in a good light; however, I don't see how it has ever fully admitted to wrong theories, practices, doctrines and then reconciled for these mistakes.  I think some of the essays are a good start, but the church has a long way to go in terms of reconciling and making restitution for some of its past mistakes.  

Link to comment
2 hours ago, CV75 said:

 

I don’t see that the Church has done anything like the things mentioned in these links, and because of Article of Faith 2, the Church does not apologize for the sins of her members.

 

Elder Uchtdorf seems to summarize the general Church attitude as follows: “And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, or doctrine.

 

“I suppose the Church would be perfect only if it were run by perfect beings. God is perfect, and His doctrine is pure. But He works through us—His imperfect children—and imperfect people make mistakes.

 

“In the title page of the Book of Mormon we read, “And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.”

 

“This is the way it has always been and will be until the perfect day when Christ Himself reigns personally upon the earth.

 

“It is unfortunate that some have stumbled because of mistakes made by men. But in spite of this, the eternal truth of the restored gospel found in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not tarnished, diminished, or destroyed. [My interjection: The eternal truth of the restored gospel is far, far more powerful than the stumbling anyone can do for whatever reason.]

 

“As an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ and as one who has seen firsthand the councils and workings of this Church, I bear solemn witness that no decision of significance affecting this Church or its members is ever made without earnestly seeking the inspiration, guidance, and approbation of our Eternal Father. This is the Church of Jesus Christ. God will not allow His Church to drift from its appointed course or fail to fulfill its divine destiny.”

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/come-join-with-us?lang=eng

 

You simply asked for examples from other religious bodies.   But two things come to mind for the LDS church to apologize for.  Clearly the priesthood ban.   Next Mountain Meadow. I doubt many staunch supporters will agree with either and likely argue strongly against the latter.  

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I know the church doesn't apologize

(Side track and soapbox here)

I've never found the point of person A apologizing for something person X did decades if not centuries ago.  Person A is in no was responsible for person X's actions!  You can acknowledge that person's X's actions were wrong, strive to be better in your life, etc.  But you can't apologize for sins you didn't do.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Jane_Doe said:

(Side track and soapbox here)

I've never found the point of person A apologizing for something person X did decades if not centuries ago.  Person A is in no was responsible for person X's actions!  You can acknowledge that person's X's actions were wrong, strive to be better in your life, etc.  But you can't apologize for sins you didn't do.

Suppose your grandfather owned a Ford truck in the 1950s and it had a manufacturing defect that was known by Ford, but they decided to hide it.  Then your grandfather dies in a crash as a result of the defect, and Ford never acknowledges that there was a defect, or if there was, that they knew about it.

Until today.  Current Ford CEO Mark Fields learns about the cover up and decides to publicly apologize for the defect and cover-up.  Are you saying that you or your family would find no value in the Ford corporation publicly acknowledging the defect and apologizing for the death of your grandfather?  You couldn't see any point in that?

I would suggest that many people would find value in such an action, even if they understand that Mr. Fields and the current Ford employees weren't responsible for the original defect.

 

 

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

As I've been taking a break from MD&D this past week, laying on a Mexican beach,

Jealous.

Quote

 Has the LDS Church ever admitted to making a mistake or error?

 I know the church doesn't apologize but certainly mistakes have been made over the years that they must regret or there have been errors in judgement over the years or there have been positions taken by the church and its various organizations that have caused unintended injury, harm or caused damaged to its members due to its policies or made by the people who have been called to positions of authority...and yet I could not think of a single example of the church ever taking responsibility, expressing regret and admitting that mistakes were made.

Can you?  If you can please share, if no. Why not?  Other faith traditions have admited making mistakes and regret why not the LDS Church?

I think you are right to observe that the Church is not great about admitting error, preferring instead to explain away the error due to other causes.
So I don't think we can legitimately say one way or the other that the Church has admitted mistakes.

Take the "ban".  The Church teaches the doctrines leading to it were in error.  But then states that they came from people, not real doctrine.
Or Adam-God.  The Church never made it official doctrine and today calls it Brigham's opinion.  Kind of, sort of, almost accurate.

Let's just say that the Church has admitted errors, but that they always do so with the best PR explanation they can come up with.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, cinepro said:

Suppose your grandfather owned a Ford truck in the 1950s and it had a manufacturing defect that was known by Ford, but they decided to hide it.  Then your grandfather dies in a crash as a result of the defect, and Ford never acknowledges that there was a defect, or if there was, that they knew about it.

Until today.  Current Ford CEO Mark Fields learns about the cover up and decides to publicly apologize for the defect and cover-up.  Are you saying that you or your family would find no value in the Ford corporation publicly acknowledging the defect and apologizing for the death of your grandfather?  You couldn't see any point in that?

I would suggest that many people would find value in such an action, even if they understand that Mr. Fields and the current Ford employees weren't responsible for the original defect.

 

 

Lawyers would have a field day with that !

Link to comment
11 hours ago, Teancum said:

You simply asked for examples from other religious bodies.   But two things come to mind for the LDS church to apologize for.  Clearly the priesthood ban.   Next Mountain Meadow. I doubt many staunch supporters will agree with either and likely argue strongly against the latter.  

Yes, I asked for them, but not "simply": I asked for them so I knew what kinds of things the OP seeks by way of examples. I don't think the facts we have about the ban and the massacre support our comparing and placing them on a par with the examples used from the Catholic Church.

Are there other atrocities (mistakes) the Catholic Church has committed that you think warrant her publicly taking responsibility, admitting the mistake and expressing regret, but she is unwilling? That would be the better comparison, which is the basis for the question in the OP.

Edited by CV75
Link to comment
7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The Institute program once put me in charge of outreach efforts on campus. After a few.....incidents they admitted that it was probably a mistake to have that position and asked me to stop.

Am I the only one who is really curious on what these incidents were?

Link to comment
12 hours ago, Jane_Doe said:

(Side track and soapbox here)

I've never found the point of person A apologizing for something person X did decades if not centuries ago.  Person A is in no was responsible for person X's actions!  You can acknowledge that person's X's actions were wrong, strive to be better in your life, etc.  But you can't apologize for sins you didn't do.

 

10 hours ago, cinepro said:

Suppose your grandfather owned a Ford truck in the 1950s and it had a manufacturing defect that was known by Ford, but they decided to hide it.  Then your grandfather dies in a crash as a result of the defect, and Ford never acknowledges that there was a defect, or if there was, that they knew about it.

Until today.  Current Ford CEO Mark Fields learns about the cover up and decides to publicly apologize for the defect and cover-up.  Are you saying that you or your family would find no value in the Ford corporation publicly acknowledging the defect and apologizing for the death of your grandfather?  You couldn't see any point in that?

I would suggest that many people would find value in such an action, even if they understand that Mr. Fields and the current Ford employees weren't responsible for the original defect.

 

 

I'm all for admitting error & moving forward, as I said previously.  

But if we run with your hypothetical situation, the idea that some Ford person nowadays could apologize for something that happened before they were born (and likely before their parents were born) is laughable.  It's not going to change anything, and honestly feels like a cheap bandaid cause something that is just talk is cheap.

Link to comment
13 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

- Polygamy

The only people who would deserve an apology for this one would be the direct descendants of polygamy.  As a direct descendant of polygamy, I for one am not looking for an apology.  On the contrary, I am indeed grateful for the practice which gave me life.  Lets face it, the world is a better place because I am in it.

Link to comment
20 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

As I've been taking a break from MD&D this past week, laying on a Mexican beach, a random thought entered my mind that I seriously couldn't answer. So I kindly ask it here.   Has the LDS Church ever admitted to making a mistake or error?

 I know the church doesn't apologize but certainly mistakes have been made over the years that they must regret or there have been errors in judgement over the years or there have been positions taken by the church and its various organizations that have caused unintended injury, harm or caused damaged to its members due to its policies or made by the people who have been called to positions of authority...and yet I could not think of a single example of the church ever taking responsibility, expressing regret and admitting that mistakes were made.

Can you?  If you can please share, if no. Why not?  Other faith traditions have admited making mistakes and regret why not the LDS Church?

Somehow, this just seems rather disingenuous coming from you.  I don't sense an ounce of concern for any potential victims of previous mistakes, instead I smell vitriol on your breath.

Link to comment
20 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

As I've been taking a break from MD&D this past week, laying on a Mexican beach, a random thought entered my mind that I seriously couldn't answer. So I kindly ask it here.   Has the LDS Church ever admitted to making a mistake or error?

 I know the church doesn't apologize but certainly mistakes have been made over the years that they must regret or there have been errors in judgement over the years or there have been positions taken by the church and its various organizations that have caused unintended injury, harm or caused damaged to its members due to its policies or made by the people who have been called to positions of authority...and yet I could not think of a single example of the church ever taking responsibility, expressing regret and admitting that mistakes were made.

Can you?  If you can please share, if no. Why not?  Other faith traditions have admited making mistakes and regret why not the LDS Church?

I think the church has admitted some mistakes, Uchtdorf in a conference address in 2013 I believe talks about mistakes of the past in general, but doesn't specifically mention any.  I think Mountain Meadows is an admission of a mistake, but the church didn't apologize.  I think some would say that the priesthood and temple ban was a mistake, but its still not clear enough for some who want to hold onto an idea that God really did have a purpose in that ban.  

PRIDE is the problem.  Pride of church leaders and church members not wanting to undermine the legacy of the past.  Its part of the our cultural worship of leaders and our ancestors.  

It would be very refreshing to have some honest reflection and apologies and admissions of error on a multitude of subjects.  I think it would be so healing for our culture.  It will take courage and vulnerability.  I'm hopeful that it can happen, it will take time though...

Link to comment
17 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Of course by using the term "The Church" it's the leaders of the church I'm referring to.  So clearly when a human is involved in a decision or a policy is made mistakes happen.  

But obviously the priesthood and temple ban was a mistake yet never acknowledged as such.  Instead the church reverses the policy, wraps it in revelation and moves on never acknowledging the damage incurred by those impacted.

Was it a mistake for Jesus not to go to any but the Jews?

Link to comment
1 minute ago, hope_for_things said:

I think the church has admitted some mistakes, Uchtdorf in a conference address in 2013 I believe talks about mistakes of the past in general, but doesn't specifically mention any.  I think Mountain Meadows is an admission of a mistake, but the church didn't apologize.  I think some would say that the priesthood and temple ban was a mistake, but its still not clear enough for some who want to hold onto an idea that God really did have a purpose in that ban.  

PRIDE is the problem.  Pride of church leaders and church members not wanting to undermine the legacy of the past.  Its part of the our cultural worship of leaders and our ancestors.  

It would be very refreshing to have some honest reflection and apologies and admissions of error on a multitude of subjects.  I think it would be so healing for our culture.  It will take courage and vulnerability.  I'm hopeful that it can happen, it will take time though...

The Church didn't commit the MMM.

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, pogi said:

The only people who would deserve an apology for this one would be the direct descendants of polygamy.  As a direct descendant of polygamy, I for one am not looking for an apology.  On the contrary, I am indeed grateful for the practice which gave me life.  Lets face it, the world is a better place because I am in it.

And the Warren Jeffs today are practicing whose polygamy?  They only exist because of the doctrine JS and BY taught.  I am also a direct descendant of polygamy -- and I am ashamed some of my ancestors ever engaged in this terrible practice.  

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

How do you separate the church's actions from its members and especially leaders?  By this logic the "church" also didn't do a whole lot of good things either.   Is the church responsible for doing anything at all whether good or bad?  

No mortal is infallible. I'll leave all such judgements up to God.

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said:

And the Warren Jeffs today are practicing whose polygamy?  They only exist because of the doctrine JS and BY taught.  I am also a direct descendant of polygamy -- and I am ashamed some of my ancestors ever engaged in this terrible practice.  

To blame Joseph Smith for the mistakes of Warren Jeffs would be like blaming Islam/Muhammad for ISIS.

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

How do you separate the church's actions from its members and especially leaders?  By this logic the "church" also didn't do a whole lot of good things either.   Is the church responsible for doing anything at all whether good or bad?  

How do you place guilt/accountability on an institution for the actions of its members who act independent of the institution?

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, pogi said:

To blame Joseph Smith for the mistakes of Warren Jeffs would be like blaming Islam/Muhammad for ISIS.

There is a connection in both examples.  It wouldn't be responsible to blame the originator of a movement for all the deeds of future followers, but to completely disassociate them is another extreme that doesn't make sense either. 

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...