Mormons and the Cross

[Mike Reed]

I am disposed to regard a revision of an earlier work as superseding the earlier version.

Me too. For what it is worth... I mention in my thesis that the Mormon Doctrine (1st edition) controversity became a major turning point for the Church. The embarrassment over the book helped McKay to privately reexamine his own beliefs, and since this time, the Church has succeeded in ridding itself of much of the anti-Catholic ideas of the past.

[Mike Reed]

In the article she said you were bent out of shape because of what Elder McConkie said about the cross, but it would appear you got torqued over "the sign of the cross" entry.

Ok. I am following you now. Because I said â??crossâ? instead of â??sign of the cross,â? you think the statement is misleading. I guess that is a fair criticism. Luckily, most readers of my thesis will probably pick up on the distinction any wayâ?¦ since there are five other instances (three before and two after) where I talk about associations of the â??sign of the crossâ? with the â??mark/sign of the beastâ?â?¦ and in all five of these statements I make the proper distinction. It is additionally fortunate that I provided McConkieâ??s full quote on the same page as my assertion about McConkie.

Anyway, it's a non-issue.

Agreed. This observation--although a valid one that will be corrected if I ever have my research published--has no bearing upon the general argument of my thesis.

[Scott Lloyd]

Me too. For what it is worth... I mention in my thesis that the Mormon Doctrine (1st edition) controversity became a major turning point for the Church. The embarrassment over the book helped McKay to privately reexamine his own beliefs, and since this time, the Church has succeeded in ridding itself of much of the anti-Catholic ideas of the past.

Do you document that he privately re-examined his own beliefs, or is that merely your conjecture?

[Bernard Gui]

Agreed. This observation--although a valid one that will be corrected if I ever have my research published--has no bearing upon the general argument of my thesis.

Actually, it's the whole notion of Mormons and the cross that is the non-issue.

Mormons deal with the cross (and the sign of the cross) in their way, and other

Christians deal with it in their way. Who cares.

Bernard

[Mark Beesley]

Would the Church discipline anyone who wore a cross?

[Mike Reed]

Do you document that he privately re-examined his own beliefs, or is that merely your conjecture?

I rely on the conclusion of Prince in Wright, who say in David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism, "In the aftermath of the enormous embarrassment caused to the church and to himself by McConkie's book, McKay quietly abandoned his private criticism of Roman Catholicism for the remaining decade of his life.... Mckay realized that the Catholic Church was not a threat to the LDS Church in Utah nor, for that matter, to the vitality of international Mormonism, whose emergence was the centerpiece of McKay's entire ministry as church president." (David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism, 122-123)

[Mike Reed]

Would the Church discipline anyone who wore a cross?

No. Although I am hesitant to make generalizations about what Bishops will and will not do (since their actions can be all over the map, at times)... I think it would be safe to say probably not.

[Mike Reed]

Actually, it's the whole notion of Mormons and the cross that is the non-issue.

Mormons deal with the cross (and the sign of the cross) in their way, and other

Christians deal with it in their way. Who cares.

Bernard

Many people care about this topic.... which is why the SL Tribune story has been so popular.

BTW... I stopped by the graduate office today, and they said they'd allow me to revise and resubmit my page that mentions McConkie's identification of the "Sign of the Cross" as the "mark of the Beast." Despite out differences, I appreciate you pointing this out.

[daz2]

True to the Faith includes the following paragraph regarding the cross:

"The only members of the Church who wear the symbol of

the cross are Latter-day Saint chaplains, who wear it on their

military uniforms to show that they are Christian chaplains."

Mike, do you know if this has always been the case; was there a time when LDS chaplains did not wear a cross on their uniforms?

[Mike Reed]

True to the Faith includes the following paragraph regarding the cross:

"The only members of the Church who wear the symbol of

the cross are Latter-day Saint chaplains, who wear it on their

military uniforms to show that they are Christian chaplains."

Mike, do you know if this has always been the case; was there a time when LDS chaplains did not wear a cross on their uniforms?

I don't know exactly how long, but LDS Chaplains have worn crosses for quite some time now. I don't think it is really by choice though. I am sure the Church would rather have another symbol for their Chaplains to wear, but the military only has a limited selection of badges currently available.

See â??Chaplain Badges,â? USA Military Medals, http://www.usamilitarymedals.com/chaplain-..._2470_2506.html

It would take a whole lot of time, effort, paperwork, and perhaps even negative publicity, for the Church to get their own badge. In 1980 the Church succeeded in getting angel Moroni symbols for their grave stones instead of crosses... but no such allowance has been provided for chaplain badges yet. See Edwin G. Sapp, â??Suitland Maryland Stake,â? History of the Mormons in the Greater Washington Area (Washington D.C.: Community Printing Services Inc., 1991), 112.

[Scott Lloyd]

Many people care about this topic.... which is why the SL Tribune story has been so popular.

Conflict between Mormons and outsiders, be it real or surmised, tends to get a lot of attention because of its sensational nature, the way a train wreck draws attention. I don't know that readership of a particular newspaper story is necessarily an indication that Mormons care about it. From my perspective, I'd have to say the Mormons within my circle of acquaintance either don't care about the matter one way or the other or would be opposed to the adoption of the cross as a symbol, seeing it as one of the trappings of sectarian Christendom from which The Church of Jesus of Christ of Latter-day Saints has always set itself apart.

There may be a lot of interest among non-Mormons because of the perceived conflict I noted above. But they really don't have standing reasonably to determine how Mormons should represent their faith.

[orion88]

Of course, there are many other examples in the book illustrating McConkie's anti-Catholicism.

I wonder if it was McKay that lead some to teach that the Roman Catholic

Church was the great harlot of the Book of Revelation.

In regards to what the Tribute stated - "Roots of opposition to the cross were

laid in the 1920s, when then-apostle McKay was president of the church's

European Mission. He noted with disdain one Catholic celebration in Belgium,

where people were "drinking and carousing until 6:30 a.m." "Two years after

becoming president in 1953, McKay pointed to a Catholic church in California

and commented: "There are two great anti-Christs in the world: Communism

and that church."

I don't think he should use the bad example of a few partying Catholics.

After all, other kinds of debauchery happened in the Mormon Church as

recorded in Doctrine and Covenants. See sections 63:13-14 and 101:6 for

a few examples.

Tony

[Mike Reed]

I don't know that readership of a particular newspaper story is necessarily an indication that Mormons care about it.

Why are you under the impression that we are only talking about Mormons? Bernard asked the question "Who cares" and I answered "many people care."

But they really don't have standing reasonably to determine how Mormons should represent their faith.

Are you under the impression that my thesis tells people how to represent their faith? My thesis, rather, focuses on the historical development of the aversion, and even ends with the statement, "The topic of whether or not Mormons 'will' (or 'should') let go of the aversion, however, is another paper to be written."

[Mike Reed]

I wonder if it was McKay that lead some to teach that the Roman Catholic

Church was the great harlot of the Book of Revelation.

McKay tended to be reserved about expressing such ideas publically, and the association of the Catholic Church with the Mother of Harlots was part of LDS Folk-doctrine long before McKay was ever born.

[Mike Reed]

My heartiest congratulations, Mike.

It seems to me that the LDS Church went through a period when it attempted to distinguish itself from other Christian churches in a number of areas, and that the Mormon aversion to the cross is one such manifestation.

Does that idea jibe at all with your research?

I talk a little bit about assimilation and retrenchment in my thesis. In specific regards to the rejection of the cross... the denomination that Mormons were most concerned about disassociating themselves from was Catholicism.

For the past 30-years or so, it seems the LDS Church has entered into a new phase where it is doing the opposite, and is trying to accentuate the similarities with other Christian faiths.

In light of this, do you think the cross may once more become acceptable Mormon symbolism?

It might. In 1916 the Church petitioned the SCL council to erect a cross monument on ensign Peak, but then gave up on that idea due to a rather loud public backlash. If the Church were to suddenly promote the material symbol of the cross today... I'd expect another backlash to happen. But I get the sense that there is a growing number of LDS who are becoming more accepting of the symbol. Perhaps a movement within the church at the grass-roots level could help make a change easier. This would seem rather proper, in my view, since the grass-roots is where the cross aversion began.

[Scott Lloyd]

Why are you under the impression that we are only talking about Mormons? Bernard asked the question "Who cares" and I answered "many people care."

OK.

My comment stemmed from an awareness that a substantial portion of the Tribune readership is Mormon; otherwise the newspaper could not maintain its dominant share of the market in Utah. I'm only suggesting that a good many of the people who clicked on the link did so not because they care about the topic but because they want to find out why someone else does. Again, "great divide" stories tend to arouse a lot of attention.

Are you under the impression that my thesis tells people how to represent their faith? My thesis, rather, focuses on the historical development of the aversion, and even ends with the statement, "The topic of whether or not Mormons 'will' (or 'should') let go of the aversion, however, is another paper to be written."

By implying that the aversion grew out of anti-Catholicism, rather than, say, inspired decisions by Church leaders, you seem to be endeavoring to pave the way for Mormon acceptance of the symbol. Whether or not that is part of your agenda, I suppose only you can say.