rockpond Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 Oh, I clearly remember the bendelos. And the lap boards depicting the "Trail to the Priesthood." When you "passed off" memorizing an Article of Faith, you got to paste a signpost sticker on the lapboard trail. How many Primary kids these days bother to memorize the Articles of Faith? It's a requirement for the Faith in God award (which I'd say about 90% or more of the primary kids in my ward earn by the time they graduate). Plus, our amazing primary chorister teaches them the Article of Faith songs.
Kenngo1969 Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 Many [youth] in my ward do [memorize/recite Articles of Faith] but that may be because after Church on Sunday the Bishop gives candy to every child that recites the one for that week.Oh, yeah?! Well, my mother always said that children who didn't eat dinner didn't get any candy, either. I'll see your "Candy-Man" Bishop and raise you ... my Bishop takes youth who recite all the Articles of Faith to dinner!
Scott Lloyd Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 It's a requirement for the Faith in God award (which I'd say about 90% or more of the primary kids in my ward earn by the time they graduate). Plus, our amazing primary chorister teaches them the Article of Faith songs.That's a terrific success rate. I'll have to suggest the Articles of Faith songs to my Primary president wife. Music is a good way to memorize things. My kids have learned a lot by listening to the "Scripture Scouts" recordings (which I find insufferably irritating, but I put up with them because the kids are learning).
Bikeemikey Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 There are a couple threads on this subject, so maybe I haven't said it here so I'll clarify...Of course the church and even the Brethren can speak to the public through a PA spokesperson (or possibly better, a spokeswoman, in this case). I think that's fine. And, I think that Kelly & the OW group should abide by the requests in the letter.But, I don't consider a PA letter to contain "church counsel" that members of the church are under some spiritual obligation to obey. OW should cancel their "protest" (or whatever they want to call it) in response to the letter out of civil respect/decency because the request by Moody on behalf of the church was polite, appropriate, and legal. (Politeness isn't a requirement -- I just thought it was worth noting.)I fully agree!
Bikeemikey Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 This is a distinction without a difference. My argument is that social pressure can force the Church to change its position on an issue -- in this case, polygamy. You counter that God told the Prophet to change course because of the social pressure, but that does not change the fact -- social pressure caused a change in Church doctrine.Therefore, to the larger point, agitating for change CAN have an effect on the Church in that it can cause God to tell the prophet to change course. Coincidentally, this seems to be just what the OW movement is seeking -- that the leaders go back to God to get a new revelation. Now, I will agree that if God does not provide such a revelation, then that should settle the matter. However, at this point, I think that OW has reason to suspect that perhaps the Brethren haven't asked "hard enough" yet.As this is an obvious fact of history I still get confused when people try to split the hair on this. Your summation above is excellent.As for the ask then stop if the answer is no, McKay asked many times on black ordination then stopped. Asking resumed later and was successful!Ask then stop may be to simple if an approach.
Gray Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) And this remark perhaps illustrates that some parties demanding priesthood ordination for women don't really buy into the doctrine that a prophet, seer and revelator has the role of receiving revelation from Christ to govern the Church. What they apparently want is some sort of democratically elected body subject to the whims of the membership -- which may be similar to how some sects in Christendom are run, but would be quite unlike the Church of Jesus Christ. I think you're operating on one set of assumptions of how revelation works, and I'm operating on quite another. But regardless of all that, it seems clear that the unfortunate result of the priesthood ban policy is that half of the membership have no voice in the church. Could that be rectified without giving women the priesthood? Yes. But that would require an even larger paradigm change than giving women what they already should have, per the scriptures and per temple practice Edited March 25, 2014 by Gray
Gray Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 I am not looking for revelation from mortals, male or female. I could go associate with any number of organizations if that's what I wanted. If you're looking for revelation without the input of people, you'll never find any.
Gray Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 If we're looking for input on children and youth then the General YM's Presidency, the General YW's Presidency, and the General Primary Presidency should have been consulted as well. And throw in Area and Stake Presidencies so we can make sure that any special needs that members in their areas might have are being taken into consideration. Or...we could remember that we sustain the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve as prophets, seers, and revelators for the membership of the entire church, not just for the men. This is a false dichotomy.
Gray Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) Are there any other official declarations by the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve that included thoughts from other members? While this may be a problem for some, the way this is done appears to be the way the Lord has always revealed his Word to the Church. Personally, I would like to have been consulted when the Blazer Scouts were renamed Eleven Year Old Scouts. Where is the romance in that? The proclamation isn't a revelation. It's a summary of preexisting policies and beliefs. Edited March 25, 2014 by Gray 2
Scott Lloyd Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 I think you're operating on one set of assumptions of how revelation works, and I'm operating on quite another. But regardless of all that, it seems clear that the unfortunate result of the priesthood ban policy is that half of the membership have no voice in the church. Could that be rectified without giving women the priesthood? Yes. But that would require an even larger paradigm change than giving women what they already should have, per the scriptures and per temple practice I reject the assertion at the get-go that women have no voice in the Church. It's clear we are poles apart on this.
Scott Lloyd Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) The proclamation isn't a revelation. It's a summary of preexisting policies and beliefs. Which came about through revelation. I have rejected your premise that for a revelation to be a revelation it has to have been written down someplace, much less canonized. "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" might be viewed in once sense as an endeavor to document if not codify what has previously been given through revelation. Edited March 25, 2014 by Scott Lloyd 3
Anijen Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 IMO the proclamation one day will be canonized. I believe out of the uncountable number of statements the church has made the proclamation is the closest to scripture and one day might be equal to such. 1
Kenngo1969 Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 They could have consulted me too and I would have told them the truth: that scouting is a complete waste of time.I don't know that I necessarily agree with that (I'm biased: Eagle Scout and former law enforcement Explorer here), but I do like what Duncan said about it a few weeks ago (paraphrasing): Scouts are required to sleep outside; Duncan said he works to prevent that from happening. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 IMO the proclamation one day will be canonized. I believe out of the uncountable number of statements the church has made the proclamation is the closest to scripture and one day might be equal to such.I agree with this and have said as much before. Alas, given the current climate of cultural conflict, to canonize the proclamation might be the very thing that sharpens the contrast and hastens the exit of those who are already on the threshold.
ksfisher Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 I agree with this and have said as much before. Alas, given the current climate of cultural conflict, to canonize the proclamation might be the very thing that sharpens the contrast and hastens the exit of those who are already on the threshold.I could certainly imagine there being a number of no votes. Do you think that this may be the reason that the church has kept it as a proclimations and not canonized it, to keep it from becoming divisive?
bluebell Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 IMO the proclamation one day will be canonized. I believe out of the uncountable number of statements the church has made the proclamation is the closest to scripture and one day might be equal to such. It would be interesting to know why it was not canonized in 2013 when the church redid the scriptures. 3
ksfisher Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 It would be interesting to know why it was not canonized in 2013 when the church redid the scriptures.I'm not sure that the two things have much to do with each other. One is creating new scripture, the other was more related to correcting errors in past printings and other technical issues. Changes were made the the bible dicitonary and other appendices, but those are not scripture.
bluebell Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 I'm not sure that the two things have much to do with each other. One is creating new scripture, the other was more related to correcting errors in past printings and other technical issues. Changes were made the the bible dicitonary and other appendices, but those are not scripture. I don't see how the reasons for the new edition really matters. Since new editions to the scriptures come out so rarely, if the leaders believed, when the 2013 edition was being put together, that the Proclamation is in fact revelation that is equal in authority to scripture, it would have made sense to canonize it at that time so that it could be included. It would save a lot of money for the church and would also make it easier on members financially. Like is said, it would be interesting to know why it wasn't included--if it had to do with timing, or if it was because the leaders don't currently consider it to be equal to scripture. 1
ksfisher Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 and would also make it easier on members financially. It didn't cost me anything to put the new edition on my ipad
bluebell Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 It didn't cost me anything to put the new edition on my ipad Just the cost of the ipad i guess. I agree though that the electronic scriptures are much easier to update and purchase than the regular kind! Members in other less fortunate parts of the world would probably think that we are very very spoiled.
Scott Lloyd Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 I could certainly imagine there being a number of no votes. Do you think that this may be the reason that the church has kept it as a proclimations and not canonized it, to keep it from becoming divisive?Yes, I think it likely. Refraining from having it be a stumbling block may be a merciful consideration.
Gray Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 Which came about through revelation. I have rejected your premise that for a revelation to be a revelation it has to have been written down someplace, much less canonized. "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" might be viewed in once sense as an endeavor to document if not codify what has previously been given through revelation. The church went to some trouble to correct the notion that the proclamation was a revelation. If you think it was, you have that right. I don't think it was any more relevatory than a reiteration of current beliefs.
Gray Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 How so? You can look for input from the Latter-day Saints while still sustaining leaders. In fact doing both is the best possible path.
Scott Lloyd Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 Just the cost of the ipad i guess. I agree though that the electronic scriptures are much easier to update and purchase than the regular kind! Members in other less fortunate parts of the world would probably think that we are very very spoiled. Church leaders did make it clear that members were not expected to go out and buy new sets of scriptures. Which is all fine and good, but I'm one who likes to have up-to-the-minute editions. Which is one reason I switched from using hard copy to electronic versions quite a while ago.
Recommended Posts