Buckeye Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 While authorized by the First Presidency, they are written in a more academic as opposed to a revelatory or teaching doctrine style, either dealing with history or with science. If more information comes to light due to discovering more documents among early Christians for that topic or documents from the modern church or the science becoming more detailed in what it can tell us in DNA, etc, these articles can be changed to reflect the increase in knowledge and that should be no more of a big deal than someone writing about doing genealogy who uses computers in contrast to articles on genealogy experiences back in the 1950s or so. Their intent is to be supportive in helping us learn the context where revelations were received and how people attempted to put those revelations into place...sometimes successfully, sometimes not. While the scriptures instruct us to gather histories of the Church including iirc attacks upon it, it does not assign this as a function of the First Presidency...they are sustained as our prophets, seers and revelators, not our historians and scientists. As such I don't see that the 'hot topic' (for easy reference) essays relate to anything that would require the First Presidence to sign them anymore than an article about someone's exploration of their ancestor's life in a family history article in the Ensign needs to be signed by the First Presidency. I largely agree with this. The FP's signature carries great weight and shouldn't be used to merely attest to the accuracy of our current historical understanding. Doing so could be counter-productive when the essays need to be revised to reflect future discoveries. That said, there are two things the FP could do that would be of great benefit. First, issue a signed statement that this work is being done under their direction. I've seen some members question the legitimacy of the essays because there is not approval from the FP. Second, for the limited instances when the essays conflict with prior doctrinal statements from the FP, the current FP needs to issue a signed statement covering those changes. As one example, the FP in 1949/1951 issued a statement affirming the curse of cain and premortal valiancy teachings as offical church doctrine revealed from God. The essay on the priesthood ban disavows those theories. While I appreciate that language, it seems weak (and even improper) for a historical essay to claim a right to disavow teachings from the FP. That's not simply a historical issue. It's a doctrinal one. And so the FP should be signing that. 1
Calm Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 the reason I dislike that they were not signed is that no one has the guts to put their name to it, thus taking responsibilityIn one of the cases I know of, this is most definitely has nothing to do with why he didn't put his own name on it.
CCRW Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 Why would they change in the future? And if they do, not dating and itemizing changes would seem the wrong.I was not speaking of listing actual authors but signing for the purpose of showing agreement/acknowledgement/sanctioning of what has been given. Much like say the Proclamation on the Family.
CCRW Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 In one of the cases I know of, this is most definitely has nothing to do with why he didn't put his own name on it.who, the author or a GA?
HappyJackWagon Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 "The articles I know of, one in particular is much the work of one man but there are others that contributed to it and it seems to me it would lead to misunderstanding to have him listed as the author, especially given that the article may be edited in the future without his involvement if he is unavailable" The Q15 signed the Proclamation on the family without claiming authorship. Why couldn't the same be done with the essays. The essays are not merely a correction of history. In some cases its also a correction of doctrine but why should anyone give credence to an essay without authorship or official church acceptance over doctrines previously taught by leaders in their official capacity. To me it feels like they are trying to keep their distance so they can have plausible deniability should things change or should people get upset.
Calm Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 (edited) Why would they change in the future? And if they do, not dating and itemizing changes would seem the wrong.Because of new knowledge. Why would it be wrong to update information on DNA as it is learned without itemizing the history of how DNA was understood in the past? but signing for the purpose of showing agreement/acknowledgement/sanctioning of what has been given. Does the First Presidency sign church manuals or magazines? Edited April 16, 2015 by calmoriah
bluebell Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 "The articles I know of, one in particular is much the work of one man but there are others that contributed to it and it seems to me it would lead to misunderstanding to have him listed as the author, especially given that the article may be edited in the future without his involvement if he is unavailable"The Q15 signed the Proclamation on the family without claiming authorship. Why couldn't the same be done with the essays. The essays are not merely a correction of history. In some cases its also a correction of doctrine but why should anyone give credence to an essay without authorship or official church acceptance over doctrines previously taught by leaders in their official capacity. To me it feels like they are trying to keep their distance so they can have plausible deniability should things change or should people get upset. I don't know that the essays are seen by church leadership as a change in doctrine (which a correction of doctrine would have to be). Maybe that's why they didn't see the need to put the official seal onto them?
ALarson Posted April 16, 2015 Author Posted April 16, 2015 (edited) The Q15 signed the Proclamation on the family without claiming authorship. Why couldn't the same be done with the essays. The essays are not merely a correction of history. In some cases its also a correction of doctrine but why should anyone give credence to an essay without authorship or official church acceptance over doctrines previously taught by leaders in their official capacity. To me it feels like they are trying to keep their distance so they can have plausible deniability should things change or should people get upset.I think you're right here. I think the leaders have learned from the past regarding this. I can't say that I blame them, but it would be great to hear from the Prophet more often rather than the newsroom or in anonymously written essays. I know we hear from the Prophet at General Conference but his talks stay pretty generic and do not even come close to touching the difficult issues members are struggling with. I know people on here can come up with all kinds of reasons and excuses for why this is done (I've heard them all), but I think it would mean a lot to members if they could hear some of these topics discussed by the first presidency. Edited April 16, 2015 by ALarson
Buckeye Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 Does the First Presidency sign church manuals or magazines? Quite often, yes. Here's a few I use with the YM in my ward: Preach my Gospel (https://www.lds.org/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/first-presidency-message?lang=eng), For the Strength of Youth (https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/ForTheStrengthOfYouth-eng.pdf?lang=eng) and Duty to God (https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/06746_eng.pdf?lang=eng). I believe they also signed the current hymnal, though I can't find an online version. Interestingly, I can't find any signature page for Handbook 2 (https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/08702_eng.pdf?lang=eng)
HappyJackWagon Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 "I don't know that the essays are seen by church leadership as a change in doctrine (which a correction of doctrine would have to be). Maybe that's why they didn't see the need to put the official seal onto them?" Except the race and the priesthood specifically "disavowed" past teachings which would seem to indicate a change.
Scott Lloyd Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 Because of new knowledge. Why would it be wrong to update information on DNA as it is learned without itemizing the history of how DNA was understood in the past? Does the First Presidency sign church manuals or magazines?That's the thought that came to me and that I was about to post. I don't need authors' names on the lesson manuals (the Church magazines do carry by-lines, incidentally) to comfortably regard them as authoritatively coming from the Church. Fussing about authorship strikes me as much ado about nothing.
CCRW Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 Brother Lloyd's pm's are full or disabled, so a public invite is required ... help a poor sinner soften his heart and join us in social - who am i
JulieM Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 So when my friend (who taught last week's lesson on Joseph Smith) asked me, "What does the Prophet or Apostles say on these topics?", the answer is "nothing"? She hoped when she was told not to use information from the essays in her lesson she could find something from the Prophet on it since it's causing her and others pain right now. They have questions and want to hear what answers their Prophet and leaders have given. I told her to search for discussions online for the essays but I don't know if she did that.
Buckeye Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 So when my friend (who taught last week's lesson on Joseph Smith) asked me, "What does the Prophet or Apostles say on these topics?", the answer is "nothing"? She hoped when she was told not to use information from the essays in her lesson she could find something from the Prophet on it since it's causing her and others pain right now. They have questions and want to hear what answers their Prophet and leaders have given. I told her to search for discussions online for the essays but I don't know if she did that. If you're looking for support to show that the essays are approved by the FP/Q12, you can certainly find that. See the comments by Church Historian Elder Snow (http://blog.fairmormon.org/2014/02/19/lds-church-essays-tackle-controversial-issues/) and (https://www.lds.org/church/news/church-posts-two-academic-essays-on-history-of-plural-marriage?lang=eng) If you're looking for advice on whether to use the essays in a particular lesson, well, I'm not sure there is anything directly on point there. That's up to local leadership and the class teacher to determine whether the material is helpful and worth the time to discuss. 1
JulieM Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 (edited) Thanks Buckeye. I'll look at that link. I think my friend (and me too) was looking for statements or teachings from President Monson in any talks he's given or any writings from him (or any of the Apostles). A lot of times people hear things and immediately ask "Well, what does the Prophet have to say about that?" Maybe we should just assume if it's on Lds.org it has their stamp of approval on it. Edited April 16, 2015 by JulieM
HappyJackWagon Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 Thanks Buckeye. I'll look at that link. I think my friend (and me too) was looking for statements or teachings from President Monson in any talks he's given or any writings from him (or any of the Apostles). A lot of times people hear things and immediately ask "Well, what does the Prophet have to say about that?" Maybe we should just assume if it's on Lds.org it has their stamp of approval on it. Actually, I think we need to move away from the expectation that a prophet or apostle needs to tell us what to think about it. We are able to come to our own conclusions and don't need an authority to direct us in all things. "“Do not, brethren, put your trust in a man though he be a bishop, an apostle, or a president. If you do, they will fail you at some time or place; they will do wrong or seem to, and your support be gone...” - Apostle George Q. Cannon, Millennial Star, v. 53, pp. 658-659, as quoted in Gospel Truth, v. 1, p. 319 1
Buckeye Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 Thanks Buckeye. I'll look at that link. I think my friend (and me too) was looking for statements or teachings from President Monson in any talks he's given or any writings from him (or any of the Apostles). A lot of times people hear things and immediately ask "Well, what does the Prophet have to say about that?" Maybe we should just assume if it's on Lds.org it has their stamp of approval on it. If it's on the church website then it's been through correlation. In theory, the FP/Q12 oversee correlation, but in practice it's impossible for them to micromanage every statement that goes up. No one could do that. However, for the essays specifically, you can rest assured that they have been heavily reviewed by the members of the FP/Q12 who oversee correlation. I can't think of any conference addresses referencing the essays, but they have been discussed/promoted by various apostles. For example, Elder Holland here (https://www.lds.org/church/news/antidote-for-fear-know-gospel-will-triumph-elder-holland-says?lang=eng) and here (https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/article/evening-with-a-general-authority/2015/02/helping-with-the-real-issues?lang=eng). They've also been prominetly promoted by the church newsroom (http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-provides-context-gospel-topics-pages) 3
bluebell Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 "I don't know that the essays are seen by church leadership as a change in doctrine (which a correction of doctrine would have to be). Maybe that's why they didn't see the need to put the official seal onto them?"Except the race and the priesthood specifically "disavowed" past teachings which would seem to indicate a change.A change in teachings for sure. I know many people who would argue that's not a change in doctrine though.
Scott Lloyd Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 A change in teachings for sure.I know many people who would argue that's not a change in doctrine though.It wasn't all that big of a change in teachings. Those old theories hadn't been widely promulgated since long before the revelation in 1978. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 (edited) Brother Lloyd's pm's are full or disabled, so a public invite is required ... help a poor sinner soften his heart and join us in social - who am iI'm not surpised my pm box is full. I'm afraid I neglect to tend it. But I'm really not interested in social. I don't even look at "In the News" very much anymore, except to view Dan Peterson's waggish notices about his Deseret News columns. "General Discussions" is pretty much the extent to which I want to be involved here. Edited April 16, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
CCRW Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 I'm not surpised my pm box is full. I'm afraid I neglect to tend it. But I'm really not interested in social. I don't even look at "In the News" very much anymore, except to look at Dan Peterson's waggish notices about his Deseret News columns. "General Discussions" is pretty much the extent to which I want to be involved here. Sorry to hear it, just want everyone to feel welcome.
JulieM Posted April 16, 2015 Posted April 16, 2015 If it's on the church website then it's been through correlation. In theory, the FP/Q12 oversee correlation, but in practice it's impossible for them to micromanage every statement that goes up. No one could do that. However, for the essays specifically, you can rest assured that they have been heavily reviewed by the members of the FP/Q12 who oversee correlation. I can't think of any conference addresses referencing the essays, but they have been discussed/promoted by various apostles. For example, Elder Holland here (https://www.lds.org/church/news/antidote-for-fear-know-gospel-will-triumph-elder-holland-says?lang=eng) and here (https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/article/evening-with-a-general-authority/2015/02/helping-with-the-real-issues?lang=eng). They've also been prominetly promoted by the church newsroom (http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-provides-context-gospel-topics-pages)And again, thank you Buckeye: I have lots to look up and read thanks to you (and calmoriah too). This place has a lot of really great people and I appreciate you both.
Kenngo1969 Posted April 17, 2015 Posted April 17, 2015 LDS.org ==> Teachings ==> Gospel Topics ==> P ==> Plural Marriage in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ==> If you would like to learn more about the beginnings of plural marriage in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, click here. Did I do something different than the average, curious person would do in order to find this information?
Recommended Posts