Thinking Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 The following statement is from the official response about the Terrible Two (I just made that up) from the LDS newsroom. In these rare cases, local leaders have the responsibility to clarify false teachings and prevent other members from being misled. It is no secret that there has been and continues to be differing interpretations on what is Mormon Doctrine. If it is the responsibility of local leaders to clarify false teachings, how much is the church bound by what a local leader clarifies?
Duncan Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 (edited) To use some examples from known local situations, 1) local leaders can tell a member that the Temple does not have a special furnace in which they burn your old garments so please don't mail them to the Temple2) Please don't bring your grocery store coupons to the Temple because the Temple is not a place where you literally get meat3) Their is no cave in Utah where the 10 tribes of Israel are located that only Pres. McKay knows where it is4) the Church does not crucify evangelicals and democrats (this guy in my ward thinks this) and a host of other such ideas that leaders can clarify Edited June 12, 2014 by Duncan 1
BCSpace Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 It is no secret that there has been and continues to be differing interpretations on what is Mormon Doctrine. It's is no secret what doctrine is and how it's defined within the Church. If it is the responsibility of local leaders to clarify false teachings, how much is the church bound by what a local leader clarifies? A local leader does not establish doctrine so the Church is not bound by anything he says. It's the local leader who is bound to communicate doctrine the way the Church does. It's not difficult for any member to do so in fact. If there is a dispute, there is a priesthood "chain of command" as one would expect and ultimately the bishops are respnsible for the doctrine taught in their wards and stake presidents for their stakes. I've seen a small number go up the line to the 'COB' over the years and each time the answer came back saying the local leader was accurate and in each case all he did was quote from an official publication.
JLHPROF Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 It is no secret that there has been and continues to be differing interpretations on what is Mormon Doctrine. It is no secret how the Church defines Church doctrine.It is no secret that there is much debate on which Church doctrine are considered "official".It is no secret that Mormon doctrine is more encompassing (including all doctrines that ever are and were a part of Mormonism). I think the only responsibility of local leaders is to reiterate established official Church doctrine, and not to add their own doctrines or interpretations. They are not in a position to be making official doctrine and therefore should not stray beyond the "party line".
stemelbow Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 The following statement is from the official response about the Terrible Two (I just made that up) from the LDS newsroom. It is no secret that there has been and continues to be differing interpretations on what is Mormon Doctrine. If it is the responsibility of local leaders to clarify false teachings, how much is the church bound by what a local leader clarifies? Not at all. I've seen a couple of instances wherein a local leader presumed to clarify a teaching that I felt the local leader was wrong about. Didn't say anything.
thesometimesaint Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 The following statement is from the official response about the Terrible Two (I just made that up) from the LDS newsroom. It is no secret that there has been and continues to be differing interpretations on what is Mormon Doctrine. If it is the responsibility of local leaders to clarify false teachings, how much is the church bound by what a local leader clarifies? The authority for local leaders to clarify doctrine lasts about as long as it takes for the Stake President to find out. 1
stemelbow Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 The authority for local leaders to clarify doctrine lasts about as long as it takes for the Stake President to find out. lol
CV75 Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 The following statement is from the official response about the Terrible Two (I just made that up) from the LDS newsroom. It is no secret that there has been and continues to be differing interpretations on what is Mormon Doctrine. If it is the responsibility of local leaders to clarify false teachings, how much is the church bound by what a local leader clarifies?Since this is in reference to a disciplinary council that has been set up to "clarify false teachings and prevent other members from being misled," and the outcome of a disciplinary council can be appealed (or agitated! or petitioned against!), it is not simply matter of a local leader clarifying a specific doctrine. But even if a local leader clarifies some doctrine and it seems "off," there are plenty of checks and balances in place for the member to get a satisfactory resolution to that also. So no teaching or decision by a local leader is necessarily binding on either the Church or the member--noting that "binding" has to be on mutually agreeable points and terms.
theplains Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 The following statement is from the official response about the Terrible Two (I just made that up) from the LDS newsroom. It is no secret that there has been and continues to be differing interpretations on what is Mormon Doctrine. If it is the responsibility of local leaders to clarify false teachings, how much is the church bound by what a local leader clarifies? Can you give some examples where church magazines have clearly identified as 'false' anythingsaid or written by any LDS priesthood holder ever? I assume that everything spoken of at GeneralConference is taught as 'Mormon truth' because I have never seen any subsequent magazine(Ensign, Liahona, etc) calling that teaching false. This also includes "doctrine" and/or "gospelprinciples". On the flip side, I have read some instances where the LDS Church points out what they considerfalse teachings of other religious groups. Thanks,Jim
JLHPROF Posted June 12, 2014 Posted June 12, 2014 I don't understand how LDS say Brigham Young was a prophet after he taught the false teaching that Mary was not a virgin when she gave birth to Christ.in the J.of D .??? Welcome to the board. And how do you know this is a false teaching? Eyewitness? Oh, and Brigham didn't teach that Mary wasn't a virgin in the mortal sense. She said she never knew a man in the flesh (and that's true if she was carried away in the spirit to be with God as Brigham did teach).
Recommended Posts