Announcement Re: Revisions to Hymnbook and Children's Songbook

[John Pack Lambert]

4 hours ago, JulieM said:

Why is it anti-Mormon to connect some of the words to doctrine that used to be taught and an oath of vengeance that was once a part of the endowment during that time?

They are a part of our history and it actually helps me understand why those words are used in this hymn.  No need to hide or deny.  It seems pretty obvious when you read through all that’s been posted here about the history of the hymn and what else was being written, spoken and taught back then.

One off hyperbolic statements in a time of more fiery rhetoric is not the same thing as doctrine.

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, John Pack Lambert said:

From having looked at how the submissions are done, at least with the newly created hymns will not have even the name of the writer easy to see. I think there will be an attemot to avoid seeing this as representing nations. 

 

On the other hand I have to say I love the idea of one hymnbook across all languages. From reading the explanation though, I think they will go for mainly hymns focusing on doctrine, and have the hymnbook if anything shorter than the current one. The idea seems to be to relegate hymns with mere cultral instead of strong doctrinal claims to use to online resources but not in the hymnbook. This may of course be reading too much into the early report, and it is also possible that the committees will come to a different conclusion in the end. We will know at some point, but probably not any time soon.

I agree.  To get consistent hymns across the languages (46) included in the email will be a huge task.  And it is open up for any more that leaders want to add, so who knows how many they are planning for.  Costs for printing would be kept down if smaller volume as well.  It sounds like most wards don't sing many of the songs anyway even here in the States and Canada, so would be wasted effort.

Quote

 Afrikaans, Albanian, Armenian, Bulgarian, Cambodian, Cebuano, Chinese, Chinese (Simplified), Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Estonian, Fijian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Haitian, Hungarian, Ilokano, Indonesian, Italian, Japanese, Kekchi, Korean, Latvian, Lithuanian, Malagasy, Marshallese, Mongolian, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Samoan, Spanish, Swahili, Swedish, Tagalog, Tahitian, Thai, Tongan, Ukrainian, and Vietnamese. If leaders need this notice in languages not listed above, they may contact the Area Presidency.

 

[John Pack Lambert]

4 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Mäßigkeit is not in the current German hymnal, at least not with that title. The tune to it is definitely In Our Lovely Deseret, but the lyrics only bear a slight resemblance.

The title of the German hymn title can be translated as "Temperance" in English, or perhaps "Moderation", and sometimes "Abstinence".  The first verse starts out like this -- with a very rough translation:

Maesigkeit ist schoen und gut
Bringt den Wangen rotes Blut
Die Enthaeltsamkeit hilft manchen aus der Not!

Temperance is fine and good
Brings red blood to the cheeks
Moderation helps many out of need

This doesn't resemble the first verse in English:

In our lovely Deseret,
Where the Saints of God have met,
There’s a multitude of children all around.

And the chorus likewise starts out completely different:

Blas die Maesigkeit Trompete
Bis sie alle Welt erstaunt

Blow the Temperance trumpet
Until it astonishes the whole world

Which doesn't even vaguely resemble:

Hark! Hark! Hark! ’tis children’s music—
Children’s voices, oh, how sweet,

There are few similar themes, since elements of the Word of Wisdom are mentioned in both, but Sis. Snow's original words were honored more by their absence in the German.

I may have misremembered some the above, but I don't think I'm far off.  We missionaries didn't like the song particularly.

The tune to "In Our Lovely Deseret" was written by a prominent Protestant hymnwriter, and was originally applied to a different song. It is interestingly the same person who wrote the tune to "Hark All Ye Nations". Which I still think is a much better hymn than "Come All Ye Souls who are enlighted" or whatever the current title of that stanza of colonialism "From Greenland's Icy Mountains" is. 

I looked it up. It started as "Tramp, Tramp, Tramp" a hymn for the liberation of union prisoners held by the defenders of slavery. It is also used as the tune of "Jesus Loves the Little Children". One time on my mission we sung this hymn with a family we were teaching, and they mentioned that connection. 

 

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

I took a speed reading course and was able to get an A after the first evaluation test due to my speed being A level and 100% comprehension (turned it into a study period instead so I never got to where I could read a textbook in less than an hour, but I found I enjoyed reading too much to want to do that anyway).  Those days are gone, but habits still remain.

It is why I like posts broken into paragraphs.

And why I like it when you link back to your replies buried in the chaff so I can pick up the details I missed at 90 mph. I have slowed down quite a bit.

 

Edited June 20, 2018 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Michael Sudworth said:

False doctrine, brother. 

The Atonement covers all sin.  

Oh man.

You vs Paiute? 

Break out the popcorn.

[John Pack Lambert]

2 hours ago, JulieM said:

If those doctrines (or oath) were being taught and believed, why wouldn’t it be normal to write about them (or sing about them)?  Why do you feel that’s anti-Mormon to consider that meaning for those words?  

Because your interpretation gives power and support to those who tried to deny Reed Smoot and every other Mormon the right to vote or serve in public office. If the effect of your statements and teachings is to deny people political rights, than calling them anti a people is truthful. 

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

Are you a nob-conformist type of thinker or does your thoughts occasionally coincide with established "group-think."

I personally do not believe that the way millions of members over many generations have accepted the words of the song is a result of group think, but are in response to the truths that are highlighted. Of course, we will have to wait for a bit until we can know Brother Joseph again or even the first time post the pre-existence.

Glenn

I don't know what the real Joseph has to do with the hymn.

I typically learn from Individual philosophers including Joseph who is one of the greatest. Typically I don't care what their followers make of what they actually said. In my mind you find the source and go straight to the source.

Even in investing I seldom go with pundits. I learn the principles and make my own decisions. I have been in business for myself for most of my life for the same reasons.

I see no reason to follow the responses of others but instead prefer to make my own.

Quite frankly I have found that the crowd is usually wrong and almost always ill-informed. That's precisely what makes them part of the mob.

Greatness in anything is by definition separation from the mob.

And "arrogance" is a word designed to keep down those who think for themselves.

Edited June 20, 2018 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I don’t concede that it’s “crowd-think” or irrational not to buy into your uber-negative, hostile construction of the words to the hymn. 

One could as easily contend that it is “crowd-think” to purvey the traditional Protestant notion that praise should not be given to anything or anyone but Deity (see the dictionary definition I quoted). 

Sorry I don't go back to sort through chaff to find quotes.  The link should be in the post. I think it's rude to expect that of people.

See everything I've written on this board forever to get a more comprehensive answer.

And yes in fact hymns should be praising God not individual men.

We are in church to commune with the divine and praise God not to praise some other mortal.

In a hymn?  Why don't we have a hymn praising every single prophet then?

If that's what Protestants believe good for them. They got something right.

To me just the very notion of "praise to a man" as a hymn to be sung at church is odd.

Let's just have a whole Pantheon of saints and be just like the Catholics?

We can start praising all the saints who are prophets and who made the list and who didn't. And then praying to them.

Wouldn't that be spiffy?

That's one of the reasons I left Catholicism.

You don't need to praise humans you need to praise God. I don't need a human to help me reach God or to plan for his brethren. That is precisely the whole idea of Catholic saints

There are so many false doctrines that song I just can't believe it.

Edited June 20, 2018 by mfbukowski

[Scott Lloyd]

55 minutes ago, kllindley said:

Don't forget D&C 135:7

I think it is as likely that the addition of the Oath to the endowment was based on the song and section 135 than that the song references the Oath. The song was published only oneonth after the martyrdom. 

Thank you, kllindley.

This "blood of the prophets" motif seems to be a recurring theme in the scriptures relating to the consequences that will be poured out upon the wicked in the last days attendant to the coming of Christ. "Earth must atone for the blood of that man" makes sense in that context, Joseph Smith being among the slain prophets.

And good catch on the history of "Praise to the Man" vis a vis the "oath of vengeance." If the oath can be traced to 1845 at the earliest, that post-dates the writing of the hymn if, as you say, it was published only one month after the martyrdom in June 1844.

And wasn't it later, during the Utah period, that Brigham Young started talking in his sermons about blood atonement?

 

Edited June 20, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[John Pack Lambert]

28 minutes ago, Calm said:

I agree.  To get consistent hymns across the languages (46) included in the email will be a huge task.  And it is open up for any more that leaders want to add, so who knows how many they are planning for.  Costs for printing would be kept down if smaller volume as well.  It sounds like most wards don't sing many of the songs anyway even here in the States and Canada, so would be wasted effort.

 

The Deseret News article has this quote from Elder Rasband "We desire to offer a consistent core collection of hymns and songs in every language that reflects the diverse needs of the global church in our day."

 

I may be reading too much into the phrase "core collection" but to me that says "it will not be a huge collection". Of course, what this looks like is very hard to say. I doubt there has been a clear decision yet on the size though. It may depend on the quality of the submissions. However this quote still makes me think that it will not be as big as the current one, but who knows.

[Calm]

18 minutes ago, John Pack Lambert said:

Because your interpretation gives power and support to those who tried to deny Reed Smoot and every other Mormon the right to vote or serve in public office.

Explain please.

[Scott Lloyd]

14 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Sorry I don't go back to sort through chaff to find quotes.  The link should be in the post. I think it's rude to expect that of people.

See everything I've written on this board forever to get a more comprehensive answer.

Sorry, I don't know what you're talking about here.

Quote

 

And yes in fact hymns should be praising God not individual men.

We are in church to commune with the divine and praise God not to praise some other mortal.

 

You're entitled to that opinion, but I don't think it's doctrinal. Or a good reason for ditching a beloved hymn.

In fact, the 13th Article of Faith declares that we seek after everything that is "praiseworthy." If someone or something is "praiseworthy," it presupposes it is OK to praise that person or thing.

By the way, did you see the question I put to you in my recent post? I'll bump the post for your convenience.

Edited June 20, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Bumping this for mfbukowski (I see that he has returned to the board):

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

Perhaps I’m missing something here. 

Has it been definitively established that the line in “Praise to the Man” pertains to the “oath of vengeance” or is it merely a matter of surmising a theory and then running with it?

I’m seeing a bit of the post hoc fallacy here. 

Edited to add: 

From 3 Nephi:

“5 And behold, that great city Moronihah have I covered with earth, and the inhabitants thereof, to hide their iniquities and their abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints shall not come any more unto me against them.” 

Could not the line as easily allude to this scriptural passage?

Perhaps it’s an allusion to the last days when the wicked will be destroyed preparatory to the Second Coming. “Blood of the prophets” seems to be a phrase laden with meaning in that context. It is repeated five times in Chapter 5 of 3 Nephi, each time in the context of Christ announcing the destruction that has come upon the Nephite cities. 

Edited further to add:

Here it is again in Matthew 23, in the context of Christ pronouncing woe upon the wicked who slay the prophets:

“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.”

To connect this with the latter days, see this Doctrine and Covenants passage from Section 87.

“6 And thus, with the sword and by bloodshed the inhabitants of the earth shall mourn; and with famine, and plague, and earthquake, and the thunder of heaven, and the fierce and vivid lightning also, shall the inhabitants of the earth be made to feel the wrath, and indignation, and chastening hand of an Almighty God, until the consumption decreed hath made a full end of all nations;
“7 That the cry of the saints, and of the blood of the saints, shall cease to come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, from the earth, to be avenged of their enemies.
“8 Wherefore, stand ye in holy places, and be not moved, until the day of the Lord come; for behold, it cometh quickly, saith the Lord. Amen.”

 

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Hey Mark, Id like to know your take on the possible doctrinal relationship of “earth must atone for the blood of that man” to the scriptural passages I just quoted from 3 Nephi, Matthew and the Doctrine and Covenants pertaining to the destruction of the wicked attendant to the coming of Christ. 

Still think this is false or non-canonical doctrine?

 

Edited June 20, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, John Pack Lambert said:

Utah is not the only state to have had firing squads. It is time to stop treating one off rhetoric as more than it was.

Sorry you are right that was a typo. I meant "has" in present tense.

Probably every state in the Union had firing squads was at one time.

Edited June 20, 2018 by mfbukowski

[Scott Lloyd]

8 minutes ago, Calm said:

Explain please.

I think he's saying that misunderstanding about blood atonement or "the oath of vengeance" was used as an excuse for denying the right of Reed Smoot to be seated after he had been elected to Congress.

But I should let John Pack Lambert explain.

[mfbukowski]

11 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Bumping for mfbukowski (I see that he has returned to the board):

 

 

Sorry, you are right, thanks for the reminder.

Honestly you can't see the difference between someone's blood being spilled atone for their own sins versus of the atonement of Jesus Christ?

You cannot see the difference between the blood of victims crying out as opposed to the blood of murderers being shed for their own atonement?

If you can't see that I really can't help you much.  Keep with groupthink. It will keep you on track.

Thanks for the reminder again bye.

Edited June 20, 2018 by mfbukowski

[Glenn101]

15 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

And yes in fact hymns should be praising God not individual men.

Joseph is no longer mortal.

16 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

In a hymn?  Why don't we have a hymn praising every single prophet then?

Because every no other prophet has "has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it."

18 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

If that's what Protestants believe good for them. They got something right.

Group think, n'est ce pas? 😎

 

[Scott Lloyd]

16 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Sorry, you are right, thanks for the reminder.

Honestly you can't see the difference between someone's blood being spilled atone for their own sins versus of the atonement of Jesus Christ?

You cannot see the difference between the blood of victims crying out as opposed to the blood of murderers being shed for their own atonement?

If you can't see that I really can't help you much.  Keep with groupthink. It will keep you on track.

Thanks for the reminder again bye.

I don't believe you are understanding me. I'm saying it appears to me more likely that the line in "Praise to the Man" alludes to the scriptures I quoted than to any "oath of vengeance" or blood atonement dogma or some such thing. Thus it has both a doctrinal and a cononical basis.

I'm saying that the "blood of the prophets" motif is a recurring theme in scriptures to refer to the destruction that will be poured out by God upon the wicked in the last days attendant to the coming of Christ."

Did you read and consider the scriptures I quoted? It doesn't appear that you did.

Let me pose the question to you again:
 

Quote

 

Hey Mark, Id like to know your take on the possible doctrinal relationship of “earth must atone for the blood of that man” to the scriptural passages I just quoted from 3 Nephi, Matthew and the Doctrine and Covenants pertaining to the destruction of the wicked attendant to the coming of Christ. 

Still think this is false or non-canonical doctrine?

 

 

Edited June 20, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, kllindley said:

Don't forget D&C 135:7

I think it is as likely that the addition of the Oath to the endowment was based on the song and section 135 than that the song references the Oath. The song was published only oneonth after the martyrdom. 

 

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Thank you, kllindley.

This "blood of the prophets" motif seems to be a recurring theme in the scriptures relating to the consequences that will be poured out upon the wicked in the last days attendant to the coming of Christ. "Earth must atone for the blood of that man" makes sense in that context, Joseph Smith being among the slain prophets.

And good catch on the history of "Praise to the Man" vis a vis the "oath of vengeance." If the oath can be traced to 1845 at the earliest, that post-dates the writing of the hymn if, as you say, it was published only one month after the martyrdom in June 1844.

And wasn't it later, during the Utah period, that Brigham Young started talking in his sermons about blood atonement?

 

To ALarson and JulieM:

Just wondering if you still think the line "Earth must atone for the blood of that man" still pertains to the "oath of vengeance" since it now appears clear that the hymn was written prior to the oath being placed in the endowment ceremony.

Edited June 20, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[Paiute]

2 hours ago, Michael Sudworth said:

False doctrine, brother. 

The Atonement covers all sin.  

No it doesn't .

It doesn't cover the sins of those who don't repent of their sins.

Nor does it cover the sin of murder or the sin against the Holy Ghost.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/forgive?lang=eng&letter=F

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, John Pack Lambert said:

President Oaks gave a very good talk about the importance of singing hymns as part of worship service.

OK, but what does that have to do with not wanting to sing a particular hymn, or just sitting it out for any reason? I can’t sing Truth Reflects Upon Our Senses because I cannot disassociate it from Life Is Like a Mountain Railroad. 

Edited June 20, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Scott Lloyd]

36 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

OK, but what does that have to do with not wanting to sing a particular hymn, or just sitting it out for any reason? I can’t sing Truth Reflects Upon Our Senses because I cannot disassociate it from Life Is Like a Mountain Railroad. 

Did you read Elder Oaks’s talk? I provided a link to it. 

[JulieM]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

To ALarson and JulieM:

Just wondering if you still think the line "Earth must atone for the blood of that man" still pertains to the "oath of vengeance" since it now appears clear that the hymn was written prior to the oath being placed in the endowment ceremony.

I think it’s referring to blood atonement.  It fits from what I’ve read of the other writings around that time (very similar wording). The oath was related to the death of Joseph, so I do see it as being all related around that time in church history.  It’s been interesting to study it more (and I learned new information about that era.). I guess only W.W. Phelps could for sure explain that line in his poem (which became the hymn).  Did he ever write about it do you know?

Now, that would be interesting to read!

Edited June 20, 2018 by JulieM

[JulieM]

2 hours ago, John Pack Lambert said:

Because your interpretation gives power and support to those who tried to deny Reed Smoot and every other Mormon the right to vote or serve in public office. If the effect of your statements and teachings is to deny people political rights, than calling them anti a people is truthful. 

Weren’t the Smoot hearings held to investigate polygamy?

Were they because of blood atonement as well?

I’d really be interested to know more, if so!

[Scott Lloyd]

21 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I think it’s referring to blood atonement.  It fits from what I’ve read of the other writings around that time (very similar wording). The oath was related to the death of Joseph, so I do see it as being all related around that time in church history.  It’s been interesting to study it more (and I learned new information about that era.). I guess only W.W. Phelps could for sure explain that line in his poem (which became the hymn).  Did he ever write about it do you know?

Now, that would be interesting to read!

But wasn't blood atonement preached by Brigham Young much later, during the Utah period? kllindley posted that "Praise to the Man" was written in Nauvoo, only about a month after the martyrdom (as confirmed by this Wikipedia entry). Was blood atonement already a thing then?

Did you read the scripture passages I posted, the ones pertaining to the recurring theme "blood of the prophets"? You never really responded to that question.I think it's more likely Phelps had in mind that scriptural theme, pertaining to the destruction that will be poured out on the wicked attendant to the Second Coming of Christ.

Edited June 20, 2018 by Scott Lloyd