Tribune Op Ed: Section 132 In Seminary This Week

[Scott Lloyd]

She just suggested to play the clip.  She didn't offer an interpretation.

Why would she suggest that the clip be played, if she didn't expect it to convey the mistaken -- and false -- impression that President Hinckley was disavowing Joseph Smith's teachings regarding plural marriage? What do modern-day, apostate off-shoot groups from the Church of Jesus Christ have to do with the topic at hand, namely teaching youth about plural marriage in the early history of the Church?

 

Or, to put it another way, do you honestly believe she wants LDS youth to come away with the impression that President HInckley in this instance was not speaking of polygamy as taught by the Prophet Joseph Smith?

Edited March 30, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[JLHPROF]

Could you expand on that? 

Do I really need to?  There have been many discussions concerning the young age of wives throughout history and the differences in their societies, preparation, upbringing, etc.  I'm sure you have access to google the same as I do.

I'm no sociologist but there are plenty of articles out there.

 

And once again, from a purely scriptural point of view, God clearly has no issues with young wives and mothers, especially considering the age of the mother of his only begotten son when she gave birth.

[JLHPROF]

And the official church position has changed on other things that were taught to be revealed of God.

 

And until it changes, asking seminary teachers to change what they teach on an issue is still wrong.

[rockpond]

Why would she suggest that the clip be played, if she didn't expect it to convey the mistaken -- and false -- impression that President Hinckley was disavowing Joseph Smith's teachings regarding plural marriage. What do modern-day, apostate off-shoot groups from the Church of Jesus Christ have to do with the topic at hand, namely teaching youth about plural marriage in the early history of the Church?

 

She's offering a different approach to teaching polygamy.  An approach that, in my opinion, creates less problems down the road.

[rockpond]

And until it changes, asking seminary teachers to change what they teach on an issue is still wrong.

 

I'm confident seminary teachers and parents who read her letter will give it the weight it deserves.

[JLHPROF]

I'm confident seminary teachers and parents who read her letter will give it the weight it deserves.

Weight.     However, I'm sure some will.  Hopefully, most have more sense.

[Gray]

Do I really need to?  There have been many discussions concerning the young age of wives throughout history and the differences in their societies, preparation, upbringing, etc.  I'm sure you have access to google the same as I do.

I'm no sociologist but there are plenty of articles out there.

 

And once again, from a purely scriptural point of view, God clearly has no issues with young wives and mothers, especially considering the age of the mother of his only begotten son when she gave birth.

 

Well, we have no way of knowing Mary's age. But while it may be understandable that earlier societies were okay with marriage at very young ages (any of us would have been fine with it had we been raised in those cultures), I think it would have been better for them to do as we do now. We in the present know something about this that our forebearers did not. 

 

The scriptures are silent on age of consent, which I think is illustrative that not all revelation comes through specific words written down in a sacred text. 

Edited March 30, 2015 by Gray

[rockpond]

Weight.     However, I'm sure some will.  Hopefully, most have more sense.

 

I figured that would be your response.  And I imagine Scott agrees.  But given the problems we're seeing in my generation with our past teachings on polygamy, I think her questions are worthy of consideration.

[JLHPROF]

Well, we have no way of knowing Mary's age. But while it may be understandable that earlier societies were okay with marriage at very young ages (any of us would have been fine with it had we been raised in those cultures), I think it would have been better for them to do as we do now. We in the present know something about this that our fore-bearers did not. 

 

The scriptures are silent on age of consent, which I think is illustrative that not all revelation comes through specific words written down in a sacred text. 

 

You are ignoring the fact that it is not about "what society said" or "what is/is not written in scripture".

If God was ok with Mary having a child, his child, at 14 there can be no sin in it.

If it was better to wait till she was 18, would God not have waited?  Did God do something less than perfectly?

[Gray]

You are ignoring the fact that it is not about "what society said" or "what is/is not written in scripture".

If God was ok with Mary having a child, his child, at 14 there can be no sin in it.

If it was better to wait till she was 18, would God not have waited?  Did God do something less than perfectly?

 

There is no way to know what Mary's age was when she married. 

[JLHPROF]

I figured that would be your response.  And I imagine Scott agrees.  But given the problems we're seeing in my generation with our past teachings on polygamy, I think her questions are worthy of consideration.

 

I never said her questions aren't worthy of consideration.  Everyone's are.

And I certainly agree that "our past teachings on polygamy" have been less than stellar.

 

But she is asking for a disavowal of Joseph's actions by seminary teachers in opposition to what the Church teaches in the essays.  She has no right to ask a seminary teacher to teach against the Church position.

 

If the Church changes its position (as it has in the past) then the curriculum will surely change with it.

As you know, I don't believe Joseph did ANYTHING wrong at all in his living of polygamy.  Others feel differently.  But for now, the lesson is the lesson and should be taught as intended.

[Scott Lloyd]

And until it changes, asking seminary teachers to change what they teach on an issue is still wrong.

I will agree with this except to substitute the word unless for until. It's not going to change.

[Scott Lloyd]

She's offering a different approach to teaching polygamy.  An approach that, in my opinion, creates less problems down the road.

If the approach includes taking a prophet's words out of context and conveying an understanding that is utterly contradictory to what he meant, I'd call that despicable.

[bluebell]

So, basically, ignore the very scripture you are teaching?

Yeah, that makes sense.

 

 

 

 

I think it just goes to show that having a great education and being trained (even in things like psychology!) doesn't guarantee that we have a handle on our own biases.

 

Teaching what the scriptures teach about why JS practiced polygamy is not 'spin'.  You can disagree with it, or think it's wrong.  But you can't call it 'spin'.  If anything, her interpretation of the events is more spin than what the seminary manual teaches.  

[bluebell]

Well, since the Church official position is that it was given by revelation from God, her ask is still inappropriate.

 

It is VERY inappropriate for her to publicly ask all seminary teachers not to follow the manual and instead teach her version of events.  

[Calm]

Do we all agree that "modern notions" about age of consent are wise and preferable to earlier systems where marriage between young girls and adult men were considered normal? Have we advanced in wisdom on this issue? I think we have. 

Given that there is plenty of promotion of teens in our culture to have sex but discouragement from getting married, I am not sure it is all that wise or just replacing one folly with another.

[JLHPROF]

There is no way to know what Mary's age was when she married. 

 

Except historical traditions as described by dozens of academics.

The Hebrew Scriptures set the normal age for betrothal at 12 1/2.  Mary was of royal bloodline descent and was presented and studied at the temple.  She would certainly have followed the standard of the Hebrew law.

 

http://www.truthortradition.com/articles/mary-a-teenage-bride-and-mother

 

 

 

But if you want to think she was over 18 because modern society picked that number, then go right ahead.

[bluebell]

She's offering a different approach to teaching polygamy.  An approach that, in my opinion, creates less problems down the road.

 

She doesn't have the authority or right to do that though.

 

Seminary teachers essentially work for the church, and she is asking them to ignore what their employer has asked them to teach and instead teach her interpretation of the gospel.  

[Scott Lloyd]

She doesn't have the authority or right to do that though.

 

Seminary teachers essentially work for the church, and she is asking them to ignore what their employer has asked them to teach and instead teach her interpretation of the gospel.  

Or more precisely, she is attempting to make their job more difficult by arousing a mob sentiment through slanted rendition of information.

[Gray]

Given that there is plenty of promotion of teens in our culture to have sex but discouragement from getting married, I am not sure it is all that wise or just replacing one folly with another.

 

I don't see a lot of promotion for that. But are teenage weddings a meaningful reponse to teenage promiscuity? I certainly wouldn't want my child getting married at 14. Or even 17. 

[Gray]

Except historical traditions as described by dozens of academics.

The Hebrew Scriptures set the normal age for betrothal at 12 1/2.  Mary was of royal bloodline descent and was presented and studied at the temple.  She would certainly have followed the standard of the Hebrew law.

 

http://www.truthortradition.com/articles/mary-a-teenage-bride-and-mother

 

 

 

But if you want to think she was over 18 because modern society picked that number, then go right ahead.

 

We know almost nothing of Jesus' birth except that He was born. There would have been nothing noteworthy or special about Mary's family. So while Mary may have been quite young (which was common), there is really no way to know what age she was. We simply have no historical data about her age at time of marriage. 

[Tacenda]

The questions, general in nature as they are, bear limited relevance to the subject at hand in that they ignore some complicating factors, including the fact that Joseph's sealings to young women likely were not marriage in the conventional sense that 21st century minds might understand it.

See here. And here.

Well then why not let them have a normal teenage life? What, did Joseph get jealous if Helen attended a party? Sounds like more than a sealing to me.

[rockpond]

I never said her questions aren't worthy of consideration.  Everyone's are.

And I certainly agree that "our past teachings on polygamy" have been less than stellar.

 

But she is asking for a disavowal of Joseph's actions by seminary teachers in opposition to what the Church teaches in the essays.  She has no right to ask a seminary teacher to teach against the Church position.

 

If the Church changes its position (as it has in the past) then the curriculum will surely change with it.

As you know, I don't believe Joseph did ANYTHING wrong at all in his living of polygamy.  Others feel differently.  But for now, the lesson is the lesson and should be taught as intended.

 

She does not ask for a disavowal of Joseph's actions.

[rockpond]

Well then why not let them have a normal teenage life? What, did Joseph get jealous if Helen attended a party? Sounds like more than a sealing to me.

 

Yes, Tacenda, I am unaware of anything that suggests Helen was still considered a single woman prior to Joseph's death.

[rockpond]

She doesn't have the authority or right to do that though.

 

Seminary teachers essentially work for the church, and she is asking them to ignore what their employer has asked them to teach and instead teach her interpretation of the gospel.  

 

Correct... And I don't think she claims any authority.  It's just an op-ed written to parents and seminary teachers.