Poll: The Family: A Proclamation to the World

[Gray]

11 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I'll see your Harold B. Lee quote* and raise you several more Harold B. Lee quotes selected from the same instructional manual you used that indicate we are obliged to follow the living prophet (bold emphasis mine). In fact, based on the quoted content below, I'm inclined to say you quoted him out of context, something you ought not do. It is misleading, dishonest and malicious.

 

*I'm just kidding with the wagering imagery. As a faithful Latter-day Saint, as a matter of moral principle, I disapprove of gambling in any form.

The context doesn't erase what he said. The scriptures are the standard by which to judge all teachings. At least according to President Lee. 

[JLHPROF]

9 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

In the formative years of the Church of Jesus Christ in this gospel dispensation, new revelations came frequently, because that was necessary for Jesus Christ to establish the Church anew and to teach his authorized servants how it was to function. These foundational revelations were recorded and made part of a scriptural canon to guide the Church going forward.

Once things were in place, such canonical revelations were necessary only once in a while, even as the anointed servants of God continued to receive continual inspiration incidental to concerns as they arose. We don't need a new, canonized revelation for every little administrative change or innovation that takes place in the Primary or Young Men/Young Women programs.

This all seems so self-evident to me that it amazes me others seem to have a hard time grasping it.

 

How about for major overhauls of previously revealed ordinances?

[CV75]

4 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

How about for major overhauls of previously revealed ordinances?

Other than the sacrament, baptism and laying of of hands (confirmation, bestowal of the Gift of the Holy Ghost, and priesthood conferral and office ordination), no other ordinance that I can think of has its precise wording or format revealed in latter-day canon, and I can especially see why the "mysteries" are not.

[Scott Lloyd]

53 minutes ago, Gray said:

The context doesn't erase what he said. The scriptures are the standard by which to judge all teachings. At least according to President Lee. 

He never endorsed using the scriptures (or interpretations thereof) as a pre-text or excuse for rejecting, murmuring against, contradicting or failing to heed what the prophets and apostles say when acting in the authority of their office under inspiration from God.

Do I need to quote again the declarations from President Lee with their very explicit wording?

 

Edited December 9, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

44 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

How about for major overhauls of previously revealed ordinances?

Please clarify your meaning.

 

[Deborah]

56 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

This all seems so self-evident to me that it amazes me others seem to have a hard time grasping it.
 

Ditto!

[Ahab]

21 hours ago, Gray said:

1 hour ago, Gray said:

The context doesn't erase what he said. The scriptures are the standard by which to judge all teachings. At least according to President Lee. 

21 hours ago, Gray said:

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-harold-b-lee/chapter-7?lang=eng

 

 

Or more precisely worded, the standard works are the standard we use to determine when other teachings are scripture, aided also by personal revelation to us, individually,  through the power vested in those who have the keys of the kingdom through who (or whom?) we have the right to the gift of the Holy Ghost.

[Scott Lloyd]

Again from President Lee:

 

Quote

 

Now the only safety we have as members of this church is to do exactly what the Lord said to the Church in that day when the Church was organized. We must learn to give heed to the words and commandments that the Lord shall give through His prophet, “as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me; … as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith” (D&C 21:4–5). There will be some things that take patience and faith. You may not like what comes from the authority of the Church. It may contradict your political views. It may contradict your social views. It may interfere with some of your social life. But if you listen to these things, as if from the mouth of the Lord Himself, with patience and faith, the promise is that “the gates of hell shall not prevail against you; yea, and the Lord God will disperse the powers of darkness from before you, and cause the heavens to shake for your good, and his name’s glory” (D&C 21:6).¹⁵

To you Latter-day Saints everywhere, that promise [in D&C 21:4–6] will be yours if you will follow the leadership the Lord has placed within the Church, giving heed to their counsel in patience and faith.¹⁶

Look to the President of the Church for your instructions. If ever there is a conflict, you keep your eyes on the President if you want to walk in the light.¹⁷

 

I don't know how he could have been any more explicit about giving heed to the current authority of the Church.

[Scott Lloyd]

President Ezra Taft Benson in a general conference talk cited the following incident:

 

Quote

 

President Wilford Woodruff tells of an interesting incident that occurred in the days of the Prophet Joseph Smith:

“I will refer to a certain meeting I attended in the town of Kirtland in my early days. At that meeting some remarks were made that have been made here today, with regard to the living prophets and with regard to the written word of God. The same principle was presented, although not as extensively as it has been here, when a leading man in the Church got up and talked upon the subject, and said: ‘You have got the word of God before you here in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; you have the written word of God, and you who give revelations should give revelations according to those books, as what is written in those books is the word of God. We should confine ourselves to them.’

“When he concluded, Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, ‘Brother Brigham I want you to go to the podium and tell us your views with regard to the living oracles and the written word of God.’ Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: ‘There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day. And now,’ said he, ‘when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.’ That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation; ‘Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth.’” (Conference Report, October 1897, pp. 18–19.)

 

 

[Zakuska]

Lets let President Harold speak for himself Scott...

"Scriptures and the living Prophets" 

 

Quote

 

Harold B. Lee, "Using the Scriptures in Our Church Assignments," Improvement Era, January 1969, p. 13. (Scripture Study Fundamentals: Instructor's Guide. Religion 315. SLC: Church Educational System, 1992, page 2.) All that we teach in this Church ought to be couched in the scriptures. It ought to be found in the scriptures. We ought to choose our texts from the scriptures. If we want to measure truth, we should measure it by the four standard works, regardless of who writes it. If it is not in the standard works, we may well assume that it is speculation, man's own personal opinion; and if it contradicts what is in the scriptures, it is not true. This is the standard by which we measure all truth.

President Harold B. Lee, "The Place of the Living Prophet, Seer, and Revelator," The Charge to Religious Educators, p. 141. It is not to be thought that every word spoken by the General Authorities is inspired, or that they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost in everything they speak and write. Now you keep that in mind. I don't care what his position is, if he writes something or speaks something that goes beyond anything that you can find in the standard church works, unless that one be the prophet, seer and revelator­please note that one exception [when he is speaking as the prophet, from earlier in the paragraph]­you may immediately say, "Well, that is his own idea." And if he says something that contradicts what is found in the standard works (I think that is why we call them "standard" -- it is the standard measure of all that men teach), you may know by that same token that it is false, regardless of the position of the man who says it.

Harold B. Lee, "Viewpoint of a Giant," (Address to religious educators, 18 July 1968, p. 6.) How do we measure whether or not one's teachings are true or false? If anyone teaches beyond what the scriptures teach, we may put it down as speculation except one man who has the right to bring forth any new doctrine­that is the one man who holds the keys -- the prophet, seer, and revelator who presides in that high place. And no one else. If anyone presumes to bring forth what he claims to be new doctrine you may know that it is purely his own opinion and you label it as such regardless of his position in the Church. If it contradicts something that is in the scriptures, you may label it immediately that it is false. That is why we call the scriptures, our four Standard Church Works. They are the standards by which we measure all doctrine and if anything is taught which is contrary to that which is in the scriptures, it is false. It is just that simple.

Brigham Young, Discourses of Brigham Young, pg. 429-430; Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young (SLC: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1997, Melchizedek Pr'd book for 1998-1999), pg. 318. I do not want men to come to me or my brethren for testimony as to the truth of this work; but let them take the Scriptures of divine truth, and there the path is pointed out to them as plainly as ever a guideboard indicted the right path to the weary traveler. There they are directed to go, not to any Apostle or Elder in Israel, but to the Father in the name of Jesus, and ask for the information they need. Can they who take this course in honesty and sincerity receive information? Will the Lord turn away from the honest heart seeking the truth? No, he will not; he will prove it to them, by the revelations of his Spirit, the facts in the case. And when the mind is open to the revelations of the Lord it comprehends them quicker and keener than anything that is seen by the natural eye. It is not what we see with our eyes-they may be deceived-but what is revealed by the Lord from heaven that is sure and steadfast, and abides forever.

Bruce R. McConkie, A New Witness for the Articles of Faith, pg. 71-72. The light and truth they receive from the spoken word and from the written record will depend on their own spiritual status. Each pronouncement in the holy scriptures, for instance, is so written as to reveal little or much, depending on the spiritual capacity of the student. To a carnal person, a passage of scripture may mean nothing; to an honest though uninformed truth seeker, it may shed forth only a few rays of heavenly light; but to one who has the mind of Christ, the same passage may blaze forth an effulgence of celestial light. That which is mystery to one is plain and simple to another. The things of the Spirit can be understood only by the power of the Spirit.

Bruce R. McConkie, The Promised Messiah, pg. 515-516. (Also quoted in Robert L. Millet, "Looking Beyond the Mark," in The Joseph Smith Translation, Monte S. Nyman & Robert L. Millet, eds, p. 208.) Many great doctrinal revelations come to those who preach from the scriptures. When they are in tune with the Infinite, the Lord lets them know, first, the full and complete meaning of the scriptures they are expounding, and then he ofttimes expands their views so that new truths flood in upon them, and they learn added things that those who do not follow such a course can never know.

Elder Bruce R. McConkie, Church News, 24 Jan 1976, pg. 4. I think that people who study the scriptures get a dimension to their life that nobody else gets and that can't be gained in any way except by studying the scriptures. There's an increase in faith [revelation] and a desire to do what's right and a feeling of inspiration and understanding that comes to people who study the gospel -- meaning particularly the Standard Works -- and who ponder the principles, that can't come in any other way.

Elder Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, pg. 765. The books, writings, explanations, expositions, views, and theories of even the wisest and greatest men, either in or out of the Church, do not rank with the standard works. Even the writings, teachings, and opinions of the prophets of God are acceptable only to the extent they are in harmony with what God has revealed and what is recorded in the standard works. When the living oracles speak in the name of the Lord or as moved upon by the Holy Ghost, however, their utterances are then binding upon all who hear, and whatever is said will without any exception be found to be in harmony with the standard works. The Lord's house is a house of order, and one truth never contradicts another.

Elder Neal A. Maxwell, Conference Report, Ensign, May 1986, pg. 34. Prior to meeting Joseph Smith, Brigham Young said he would have crawled around the earth on his hands and knees to meet some- one like Moses who could tell him anything "about God and heaven." (In Journal of Discourses, 8:228.) Through Joseph Smith we have additional pages from Moses about God and heaven. We have only to reach to the bookshelf or go to priesthood meeting. Perhaps the way is almost too easy and too simple; we might be more appreciative if on hands and knees. (See 1 Ne. 17:41.) Only by searching the scriptures, not using them occasionally as quote books, can we begin to understand the implications as well as the declarations of the gospel.

... These truths] are not just theological niceties and philosophical footnotes. We need to ponder their implications as well as believe in their declarations regarding daily and eternal life. One cannot have adequate faith in a Christ whom he does not adequately know [Jn 17:3; D&C 132:20-25] ...

The initial labor we have to perform with regard to these doctrines is only to look (see 1 Ne 17:41), firmly averting our gaze from the comparative slums of the secular world, with its grabbiness and grubbiness.

... do not be surprised when non-doers scoff. Do not be surprised, either, if these doctrines unsettle some.... The only cure for doctrinal illiteracy of those who murmur will be to learn doctrines.

Boyd K. Packer, "The Mystery of Life," Ensign 11/83, p. 17. For His own reasons, the Lord provides answers to some questions, with pieces placed here and there throughout the scriptures. We are to find them; we are to earn them. In that way sacred things are hidden from the insincere.

Boyd K. Packer, Ensign, May 1974, pg. 95. There are those who have made a casual, even an insincere effort to test the scriptures and have come away having received nothing, which is precisely what they have earned and what they deserve. If you think it will yield to a casual inquiry, to idle curiosity, or even to well intentioned but temporary searching, you are mistaken. It likewise will not yield to the overzealous or to the fanatic.

Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3:203-204. (Italics in original.) It makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said, if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside. My words, and the teachings of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear. We have accepted the four standard works as the measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man's doctrine.

You cannot accpet the books written by the authorities of the Church as standards in doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works.

Every man who writes is responsible, not the Church, for what he writes. If Joseph Fielding Smith writes something which is out of harmony with the revelations, then every member of the Church is duty bound to reject it. If he writes that which is in perfect harmony with the revealed word of the Lord, then it should be accepted.

President Ezra Taft Benson, "The Book of Mormon & the Doctrine & Covenants," Ensign, May 1987, pg. 83-85. (p. 84) It is important that in our teaching we make use of the language of holy writ. Alma said, "I ... do command you in the language of him who hath commanded me" (Alma 5:61).

The words and the way they are used in the Book of Mormon by the Lord should become our source of understanding and should be used by us in teaching gospel principles.

God uses the power of the word of the Book of Mormon as an instrument to change people's lives.... [See Alma 31:5.]

I am deeply concerned about what we are doing to teach the Saints at all levels the gospel of Jesus Christ as completely and authoritatively as do the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants. By this I mean teaching the "great plan of the Eternal God," to use the words of Amulek (Alma 34:9).

Are we using the messages and the method of teaching found in the Book of Mormon and other scriptures of the Restoration to teach this great plan of the Eternal God?

(p. 85) Are we accepting and teaching what the revelations tell us about the Creation, Adam and the fall of man, and redemption from that fall through the atonement of Christ?...

Now, what should be the source for teaching the great plan of the Eternal God? The scriptures, of course­particularly the Book of Mormon. This should also include the other modern-day revelations. These should be coupled with the words of the Apostles and prophets and the promptings of the Spirit.

Wilford Woodruff, quoted by Ezra Taft Benson in "14 Fundamentals in Following the Prophets," from Conference Report, October, 1897, pg. 18-19. I will refer to a certain meeting I attended in the town of Kirtland in my early days. At that meeting some remarks were made that have been made here today, with regard to the living oracles and with regard to the written word of God. The same principle was presented, although not as extensively as it has been here, when a leading man in the Church got up and talked upon the subject, and said: "You have got the word of God before you here in the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; you have the written word of God, and you who give revelations should give revelations according to those books, as what is written in those books is the word of God. We should confine ourselves to them.'"

When he concluded, Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, "Brother Brigham, I want you to take the stand and tell us your views with regard to the written oracles and the written word of God.'"

Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: "There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost to our day. And now," he said, "when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books." That was the course he pursued.

When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation: "Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth."

 

 

 

http://emp.byui.edu/marrottr/ScripturesAndTheLivPro.htm

 

If you won't heed the words of the Anointed Prophets of God re: Authority of the Standard Works... their isn't much more to say on the subject.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Zakuska

[Sleeper Cell]

If the Proclamation were formally canonized at the next conference, what difference would it make?  

[Deborah]

23 minutes ago, Sleeper Cell said:

If the Proclamation were formally canonized at the next conference, what difference would it make?  

It will give everyone who wants to find fault an opportunity to protest because, well, they didn't really believe it was serious. Just like the current policy on gays.

 

[why me]

13 hours ago, Maedros said:

I think that it could very well be that the proclamation was presented back then to pre-empt the attack on gender roles and traditional values that are happening today and especially in this year (20 years after it was proclaimed) - the Word of Wisdom for instance was presented long before alcohol and tobacco and drugs became so widespread and destructive. 

Or we can actually say that the proclamation was a revelation for its time because the Lord knew what was in store for the family. And lets face it...it is a document that was ahead of its time. And it still stands as a beacon of light for the world to read. But....as the west continues into moral relativity and moral secularism, many people will see the proclamation as a negative. Unfortunately. The proclamation was given during the heyday of postmodernism, a philosophy that still is given us aftershocks.

http://global.britannica.com/topic/postmodernism-philosophy

[Gray]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

He never endorsed using the scriptures (or interpretations thereof) as a pre-text or excuse for rejecting, murmuring against, contradicting or failing to heed what the prophets and apostles say when acting in the authority of their office under inspiration from God.

Do I need to quote again the declarations from President Lee with their very explicit wording?

 

He was very clear when he said that the scriptures are the standard for discerning true from false doctrine, or true doctrine from opinion. Additional context doesn't change that. Obviously you think otherwise. Maybe you explain your reasoning there. 

Edited December 9, 2015 by Gray

[Gray]

1 hour ago, Zakuska said:

Lets let President Harold speak for himself Scott...

"Scriptures and the living Prophets" 

 

 

http://emp.byui.edu/marrottr/ScripturesAndTheLivPro.htm

 

If you won't heed the words of the Anointed Prophets of God re: Authority of the Standard Works... their isn't much more to say on the subject.

 

Excellent!

 

Quote

President Harold B. Lee, "The Place of the Living Prophet, Seer, and Revelator," The Charge to Religious Educators, p. 141. It is not to be thought that every word spoken by the General Authorities is inspired, or that they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost in everything they speak and write. Now you keep that in mind. I don't care what his position is, if he writes something or speaks something that goes beyond anything that you can find in the standard church works, unless that one be the prophet, seer and revelator­please note that one exception [when he is speaking as the prophet, from earlier in the paragraph]­you may immediately say, "Well, that is his own idea." And if he says something that contradicts what is found in the standard works (I think that is why we call them "standard" -- it is the standard measure of all that men teach), you may know by that same token that it is false, regardless of the position of the man who says it.

 

[HappyJackWagon]

22 minutes ago, why me said:

Or we can actually say that the proclamation was a revelation for its time because the Lord knew what was in store for the family. And lets face it...it is a document that was ahead of its time. And it still stands as a beacon of light for the world to read. But....as the west continues into moral relativity and moral secularism, many people will see the proclamation as a negative. Unfortunately. The proclamation was given during the heyday of postmodernism, a philosophy that still is given us aftershocks.

http://global.britannica.com/topic/postmodernism-philosophy

I hear this often. The proclamation was "ahead of its time" and clearly "prophetic."

I'm curious why this is "ahead of it's time". It fit the time perfectly. There were legal battles about SSM going on and the church wanted to be involved and have some standing with the courts. It didn't require foresight. It was a well placed, well timed document towards the beginning of the legal battles. 

[Scott Lloyd]

15 minutes ago, Gray said:

He was very clear when he said that the scriptures are the standard for discerning true from false doctrine, or true doctrine from opinion. Additional context doesn't change that. Obviously you think otherwise. Maybe you explain your reasoning there. 

I've already made myself very clear by providing numerous quotes from President Lee from the very manual you yourself quoted from initially. Did you not bother to look further in the manual beyond the one cherry-picked quote?

Here they are again. What part of "You go back and read the speech of the present leader of the Church on this subject, and you have all the authority that you should look for" don't you understand?

 

Quote

 

Why must we follow the prophet?

Now, may this be the day for us to reflect seriously, to remember what the Lord has already told us. His prophet is upon the earth today, and if you want to know the last revelation that has come to this people, you get down the last conference report and read carefully especially what the First Presidency said. … You will have the best and the last word that has been given from our Heavenly Father. We don’t have to depend solely upon what is in the standard Church works. In addition to what the scriptures have told us, we have what the prophets today are telling us here and now, and it is for us if we want to be saved on Zion’s hill, when these perils come, to hear and obey.¹³

So often today when our brethren do speak authoritatively, we have some who rise up to challenge and say, “Now, just where can I find some authority that you can cite for what you are saying?” We are tempted to say, “You go back and read the speech of the present leader of the Church on this subject, and you have all the authority that you should look for, because this is the Lord’s way. His prophet is here, and revelation is just as needed and is just as much in evidence as it has been in any time in any dispensation of the gospel upon the earth.”¹⁴

Now the only safety we have as members of this church is to do exactly what the Lord said to the Church in that day when the Church was organized. We must learn to give heed to the words and commandments that the Lord shall give through His prophet, “as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me; … as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith” (D&C 21:4–5). There will be some things that take patience and faith. You may not like what comes from the authority of the Church. It may contradict your political views. It may contradict your social views. It may interfere with some of your social life. But if you listen to these things, as if from the mouth of the Lord Himself, with patience and faith, the promise is that “the gates of hell shall not prevail against you; yea, and the Lord God will disperse the powers of darkness from before you, and cause the heavens to shake for your good, and his name’s glory” (D&C 21:6).¹⁵

To you Latter-day Saints everywhere, that promise [in D&C 21:4–6] will be yours if you will follow the leadership the Lord has placed within the Church, giving heed to their counsel in patience and faith.¹⁶

Look to the President of the Church for your instructions. If ever there is a conflict, you keep your eyes on the President if you want to walk in the light.¹⁷

If our people want to be safely guided during these [troubled] times of deceit and false rumors, they must follow their leaders and seek for the guidance of the Spirit of the Lord in order to avoid falling prey to clever manipulators who, with cunning sophistry, seek to draw attention and gain a following to serve their own notions and sometimes sinister motives.¹⁸

Now there were a lot of people in the days of the Master who did not accept Him as the Son of God. There were some who said, “Oh, He is just the son of Joseph, the carpenter.” Others said, “He is a Prince of Beelzebub,” which means the son of the devil. When He performed some of these miraculous things they said, “He is a winebibber,” meaning he had just been drinking strong wine. There were only a very few who could say, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” (Matthew 16:16.) Why couldn’t everybody see Him as the Son of God?

 

 

[Scott Lloyd]

11 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I hear this often. The proclamation was "ahead of its time" and clearly "prophetic."

I'm curious why this is "ahead of it's time". It fit the time perfectly. There were legal battles about SSM going on and the church wanted to be involved and have some standing with the courts. It didn't require foresight. It was a well placed, well timed document towards the beginning of the legal battles. 

I think it was ahead of its time in that relatively few people realized there would so quickly come a time when the very definition of marriage would be changed so fundamentally and that such a large segment of society would accept that redefinition.

The proclamation put the Church on record early on as opposing such a thing, and now, one can point to the proclamation and say it is the world that has drifted in its standards of decency, not the Church.

[CV75]

Taking a look at the Harold B. Lee quotes that have been offered:

Showing the prophets as authoritative:

In addition to what the scriptures have told us, we have what the prophets today are telling us here and now, and it is for us if we want to be saved on Zion’s hill, when these perils come, to hear and obey.

 

Showing the scriptures as their standard:

We call these the standard Church works because they are standard. If you want to measure truth, measure it by the four standard Church works. … If it is not in the standard works, you may well assume that it is speculation.

 

Showing the redeeming bridge between the two:

All that we teach in this Church ought to be couched in the scriptures. … We ought to choose our texts from the scriptures, and wherever you have an illustration in the scriptures or a revelation in the Book of Mormon, use it, and do not draw from other sources where you can find it here in these books.

 

How the Proclamation meets the criteria for being both in addition to scripture and being couched in the standard works:

 “…we of the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles [meets the authoritative criterion] now issue a proclamation to the Church and to the world as a declaration and reaffirmation of standards, doctrines [meets the scriptural and standard works criterion], and practices relative to the family which the prophets, seers, and revelators of this church have repeatedly stated throughout its history” (“Stand Strong against the Wiles of the World, ”Ensign, Nov. 1995, 100).

[Deborah]

26 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I hear this often. The proclamation was "ahead of its time" and clearly "prophetic."

I'm curious why this is "ahead of it's time". It fit the time perfectly.

Yes it did, which is the point. What no one foresaw however was our time.

[JLHPROF]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

Other than the sacrament, baptism and laying of of hands (confirmation, bestowal of the Gift of the Holy Ghost, and priesthood conferral and office ordination), no other ordinance that I can think of has its precise wording or format revealed in latter-day canon, and I can especially see why the "mysteries" are not.

 

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Please clarify your meaning.

 

Baptism - unchanged (I think...not positive)

Confirmation - unchanged

Sacrament - ordinance changed

Conferral of Priesthood - changed and then changed back, offices removed

Dedicatory prayers - changed

Mothers Blessings (anointings) - eliminated

Law of Adoption sealings - eliminated

Garments - changed both design and ordinance

Endowment teachings - changed

Endowment ordinances - changed

Second Endowments - virtually stopped, stuff of rumour today

 

Now, to be 100% clear, this may all be perfectly fine and may even have come from revelation.  But we just don't know.  It's asking a lot on faith for us to accept these things given that:

"Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed. All must be saved on the same principles."

and

"Isaiah 24:5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant."

 

Edited December 9, 2015 by JLHPROF

[Russell C McGregor]

6 hours ago, Zakuska said:

I know that he ment precisely what he said.  I'll see your Harold B. Lee and raise you an Isaiah.

Isaiah 8

 19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? 20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

If a spirit lead Prophet speculates beyond what the "scriptures" (aka "law and testimony") contains... we better be questioning what spirit he/she is being directed by.

 

Says the fellow who thinks sodomy is higher and holier than honourable marriage.

 

[CV75]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

Baptism - unchanged (I think...not positive)

Confirmation - unchanged

Sacrament - ordinance changed

Conferral of Priesthood - changed and then changed back, offices removed

Dedicatory prayers - changed

Mothers Blessings (anointings) - eliminated

Law of Adoption sealings - eliminated

Garments - changed both design and ordinance

Endowment teachings - changed

Endowment ordinances - changed

Second Endowments - virtually stopped, stuff of rumour today

Now, to be 100% clear, this may all be perfectly fine and may even have come from revelation.  But we just don't know.  It's asking a lot on faith for us to accept these things given that:

"Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed. All must be saved on the same principles."

and

"Isaiah 24:5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant."

Yes, baptism and the laying on of hands remain unchanged. These are in our scriptures. The sacramental prayer, also in scripture, has not changed (substituting water for wine was revealed and is in scripture).

The other performances listed are not as well defined or stipulated in scripture. I think the exercise of the keys of the kingdom, this dispensation and the mysteries of God is shown to have quite a bit of latitude “for helps and for governments, for the work of the ministry and the perfecting of my saints (D&C 124:143),” since “whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

For example, Nephi in Helaman 10 was given the sealing power, “even that all things shall be done unto thee according to thy word, for thou shalt not ask that which is contrary to my will… Behold, I give unto you power, that whatsoever ye shall seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven; and thus shall ye have power among this people.”

From these scriptures it is reasonable to conclude that none of the ordinances managed by the Church have changed contrary to the Lord’s will.

Scripturally, the only ordinances that were instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world are baptism (for both the living and the dead—see applicable verses in D&C 124 and 128), priesthood conferral and ordination (Alma 13:5), and the Atonement (Moses 5:57).

The new and everlasting covenant is the “is the sum total of all gospel covenants and obligations”, the particulars of which (outside the few exceptions mentioned) can change from time to time. Good article: https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/12/the-new-and-everlasting-covenant?lang=eng

[Stone holm]

On December 7, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Glenn101 said:

Could you please tell us what you consider to be a bad idea??? And do you have any scriptural references to bolster that opinion?

 

I think that the Proclamation is doctrinal and will eventually be canonized. There may be a few more who exit the Church when that happens.

 

Glenn

Gender stereotyping

[Anijen]

Doctrinal and on the same level as scripture.