Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Apparently new policy is no longer


Recommended Posts

Posted
Quote

But no more. A spokesman for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has confirmed that the Nelson illustration has been removed from the lesson on "prophets and revelation" — as Mormon authorities continue to develop the new online training for teachers who instruct Mormon high-schoolers.

http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/4325258-155/lord-giveth-and-new-manual-taketh

The trib is reporting that it's confirmed the new policy will be out of the coming manual.  That's a good thing.  What does that say about revelation, policy?

Posted
29 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/4325258-155/lord-giveth-and-new-manual-taketh

The trib is reporting that it's confirmed the new policy will be out of the coming manual.  That's a good thing.  What does that say about revelation, policy?

That only canonized revelation should be in the manual.
All else is just speculation.  Isn't that what people are always telling me?

Posted
1 minute ago, ALarson said:

I sincerely hope that the rumors are true about it also being removed from next year's handbook.

Me too.  I can see where the church is coming from, and i think their goal was kind and reasonable (to protect kids from being taught their families are not condoned by God and that divorce is the only way to fix it), but I think the policy was too broad with not enough wiggle room for individual circumstances.

Posted
1 minute ago, ALarson said:

Sounds like there may be some disagreement and confusion regarding this policy behind the scenes or possibly even within the leadership.

I sincerely hope that the rumors are true about it also being removed from next year's handbook.

As it isn't in a printed handbook it won't have to be removed.  If the church wanted to remove it from the electronic versions of the handbook they could do it today.

Posted
Just now, ksfisher said:

As it isn't in a printed handbook it won't have to be removed.  If the church wanted to remove it from the electronic versions of the handbook they could do it today.

The article mentions it being removed from the seminary lesson manual, but perhaps ALarson thought it was talking about the leadership handbook.

Posted
3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

The article mentions it being removed from the seminary lesson manual, but perhaps ALarson thought it was talking about the leadership handbook.

I think that rumors have been quoted here in the past that the policy would be removed from the handbook, the printed version of which it has never appeared in to my knowledge. 

Has there been a revision to the printed version since the 2010 edition?

Posted
22 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Sounds like there may be some disagreement and confusion regarding this policy behind the scenes or possibly even within the leadership.

I sincerely hope that the rumors are true about it also being removed from next year's handbook.

Somebody near the top has to come to the realization that the policy, in effect, does nothing but offer a jab at gay people who are associated with the Church in some way, and a punch in the gut to those of us who think the Church will change regarding LGBTQ issues.

 

Posted
11 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I think that rumors have been quoted here in the past that the policy would be removed from the handbook, the printed version of which it has never appeared in to my knowledge. 

Has there been a revision to the printed version since the 2010 edition?

I don't know has there been a new version, even digitally, since the Nov 2015 change?  Or are leaders allowed to disregard the policy because it does not appear in the 2010 printed version? 

I'm not sure how that's all supposed to work.  Will they ever see a need to print another hard copy for distribution?

Posted
2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Somebody near the top has to come to the realization that the policy, in effect, does nothing but offer a jab at gay people who are associated with the Church in some way, and a punch in the gut to those of us who think the Church will change regarding LGBTQ issues.

 

What is your source for this?  I don't see how changing a lesson in a seminary manual signifies that the current policy will be changed.  I could imagine that lesson materials are under constant revision until publication.

Posted
Just now, ksfisher said:

What is your source for this?  I don't see how changing a lesson in a seminary manual signifies that the current policy will be changed.  I could imagine that lesson materials are under constant revision until publication.

I was just thinking, you would think (or rather I would) that someone near the top has got to realize at some point the policy change is dumb.  It's way too obvious.  With that said, I was showing support for the hope that the policy with be excised altogether. 

Posted
1 minute ago, stemelbow said:

I was just thinking, you would think (or rather I would) that someone near the top has got to realize at some point the policy change is dumb.  It's way too obvious.  With that said, I was showing support for the hope that the policy with be excised altogether. 

I thought you were just referring to it being removed from discussion or info in the seminary manual.  

Posted (edited)

seminary manual or leadership manual, which manual? if it's the seminary one then who cares but if it's the leadership one then that poses a problem

Edited by Duncan
Posted
4 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I thought you were just referring to it being removed from discussion or info in the seminary manual.  

That's what the thread is. 

Posted
1 minute ago, stemelbow said:

That's what the thread is. 

Agreed.  That's why your answer to ksfisher confused me.  Sorry if I misunderstood.

Posted
9 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I was just thinking, you would think (or rather I would) that someone near the top has got to realize at some point the policy change is dumb.  It's way too obvious. 

Apparently the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve do not see things the same way.  16.13 is still in my electronic copy of Handbook 1.  If the church wanted to change this they could remove it at any time.

Posted
5 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Apparently the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve do not see things the same way.  16.13 is still in my electronic copy of Handbook 1.  If the church wanted to change this they could remove it at any time.

Good to know.  That means when they do agree to excise the policy they can do it quite easily.  ;)

Posted
8 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Agreed.  That's why your answer to ksfisher confused me.  Sorry if I misunderstood.

Nah...i'm not being very consistent in my replies.  The confusion was on my end. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Good to know.  That means when they do agree to excise the policy they can do it quite easily.  ;)

I would think that it wouldn't be smart for anyone to be holding their breath. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I would think that it wouldn't be smart for anyone to be holding their breath. 

I'm not holding my breath, but this certainly is a step in the right direction.  

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, cinepro said:

 

Because the third option, that God did institute the policy through revelation but they're wary of teaching this in seminary even though it's true is a path I'm not sure I'd want to go down.  Hopefully the PR department can help them out in these difficult times.

I am just so excited!!! I know what happens next - the Angel with the Drawn Sword/Scimitar comes and says, "teach them about the children of the gays or I will cut you!"

Edited by maxrep12
Could be a scimitar
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...