Chasing Down Purported Quote from "Standard of Truth"

[smac97]

I just saw this on Facebook:

 

From the FB post on this: 

Quote

Cracklin’ Rosie

4d  · 

 Dear Mormon Church, this is literally gaslighting.  #stellahendrix #standfortruthandrighteousness #sistersinzion #exmo #exmormon #exmormonmemes #mormonprophetquotes #followtheprophet #latterdaysaints #ldsgaslighting

— in Temple Square.

"Literally."  Huh.

Anyway, the above quote on the right is authentic, coming from a 1971 Ensign article by Pres. Spencer W. Kimball, then the Acting President of the Q12.

The quote on the left is proving tricky to track down.  It is enclosed by quotations marks, with no ellipses or brackets or anything, so it would seem to be a verbatim quote.  And the wording above it heavily implies that it comes from the Church's publication, Saints, Volume 1, The Standard of Truth, 1815–1846.  Per the online index, there are references to "Lamanite" on pages 61–62, 65, 72 and 108.  None of these correspond to the above quote in any way.

I did find a verbatim recitation of the above quote ("The church does not take a position on who the Lamanites were, nor where any groups in the Americas or the Pacific originated") on an anonymous Reddit essay published five years ago: Changing the Narrative: Lamanite Identity Church History Topic

An excerpt:

Quote

In a new church history topics essay, TSCC tries to change the narrative that it ever taught that Native Americans were Lamanites.

 

I've been reading the 100 or so church history topic essays published online in conjunction with the Saints book. One essay on American Indians in particular had me curious. It references another essay, "Lamanite Identity", which isn't listed on the side with the other essays and clicking on the link doesn't take you anywhere. However, filling in the URL takes you to the essay. There are some absolute gems in how the church is changing the narrative in regards to who Lamanites supposedly are:

1. Implication that only early Mormons considered Native Americans to be Lamanites:

While some early Latter-day Saints speculated about which specific groups were the descendants of Book of Mormon peoples, most considered the Native Americans broadly as heirs to Book of Mormon promises.

2. "Saints who Identified as Lamanites"

At least three times, the essay uses the terminology "saints who identified as Lamanites", giving the implication that these people chose to self-identify this way, not that the Church itself told them that they were Lamanites.

Saints who identified as Lamanites regularly worked on their own or in cooperation with Church initiatives to advance spiritually and temporally and help fulfill the prophecy that “before the great day of the Lord shall come … the Lamanites shall blossom as the rose.”

Saints who have identified as Lamanites have made substantial contributions to the Church and to their communities as they have aimed to realize the Lord’s promises to His covenant people.

Even in cases of cooperation, members of groups who identified as Lamanites have not always felt sufficiently counseled with during the planning and administering of programs.

3. The church does not take a position on who the Lamanites were, nor where any groups in the Americas or the Pacific originated:

Just as the history of the northern ten tribes of Israel after their exile in Assyria is a matter of speculation rather than knowledge, the history of the Lamanites after the close of the Book of Mormon record is a matter of speculation. The Church asserts that all members are part of the covenant house of Israel either by descent or adoption but does not take a position on the specific geography of the Book of Mormon or claim complete knowledge about the origins of any specific modern group in the Americas or the Pacific. Whatever the historical particulars, the Church continues its efforts to help realize the hopes of Book of Mormon prophets that the covenants of the Lord might be extended to all the lost sheep of Israel.

This last example is, to me, the most aggregious example of changing the narrative. I grew up in the days of Kimball, who unabashedly proclaimed the all native persons in the Americas and the Pacific islands were Lamanites and all descended from Lehi. This was the whole reason for the church running the Indian Placement Program - the mistaken belief that they were helping the Lamanites blossom as the rose. Specifically, here are some examples of these teachings as I learned them growing up in the church in the late 1970's to 1980's...

Item #3 above corresponds with the FB meme.  It is apparently an attempt to summarize the Church's article, Lamanite Identity.  Particularly, this bit (quoted above) :

Quote

Just as the history of the northern ten tribes of Israel after their exile in Assyria is a matter of speculation rather than knowledge, the history of the Lamanites after the close of the Book of Mormon record is a matter of speculation. The Church asserts that all members are part of the covenant house of Israel either by descent or adoption but does not take a position on the specific geography of the Book of Mormon or claim complete knowledge about the origins of any specific modern group in the Americas or the Pacific. Whatever the historical particulars, the Church continues its efforts to help realize the hopes of Book of Mormon prophets that the covenants of the Lord might be extended to all the lost sheep of Israel.

So we have

• A) the Church's Lamanite Identity article, which is heavily distorted and mischaracterized and very loosely paraphrased in 
• B) an anonymous Reddit essay, from which a line is extracted and quoted in
• C) the above Facebook meme, which falsely attributes the statement as
• D) a verbatim quote from Saints, Volume 1, The Standard of Truth.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

[CV75]

17 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I just saw this on Facebook:

 

From the FB post on this: 

"Literally."  Huh.

Anyway, the above quote on the right is authentic, coming from a 1971 Ensign article by Pres. Spencer W. Kimball, then the Acting President of the Q12.

The quote on the left is proving tricky to track down.  It is enclosed by quotations marks, with no ellipses or brackets or anything, so it would seem to be a verbatim quote.  And the wording above it heavily implies that it comes from the Church's publication, Saints, Volume 1, The Standard of Truth, 1815–1846.  Per the online index, there are references to "Lamanite" on pages 61–62, 65, 72 and 108.  None of these correspond to the above quote in any way.

I did find a verbatim recitation of the above quote ("The church does not take a position on who the Lamanites were, nor where any groups in the Americas or the Pacific originated") on an anonymous Reddit essay published five years ago: Changing the Narrative: Lamanite Identity Church History Topic

An excerpt:

Item #3 above corresponds with the FB meme.  It is apparently an attempt to summarize the Church's article, Lamanite Identity.  Particularly, this bit (quoted above) :

So we have

• A) the Church's Lamanite Identity article, which is heavily distorted and mischaracterized and very loosely paraphrased in 
• B) an anonymous Reddit essay, from which a line is extracted and quoted in
• C) the above Facebook meme, which falsely attributes the statement as
• D) a verbatim quote from Saints, Volume 1, The Standard of Truth.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

This is the kind of thing where laziness really does bite the lazy in the butt.

Edited May 3 by CV75

[pogi]

49 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I just saw this on Facebook:

 

From the FB post on this: 

"Literally."  Huh.

Anyway, the above quote on the right is authentic, coming from a 1971 Ensign article by Pres. Spencer W. Kimball, then the Acting President of the Q12.

The quote on the left is proving tricky to track down.  It is enclosed by quotations marks, with no ellipses or brackets or anything, so it would seem to be a verbatim quote.  And the wording above it heavily implies that it comes from the Church's publication, Saints, Volume 1, The Standard of Truth, 1815–1846.  Per the online index, there are references to "Lamanite" on pages 61–62, 65, 72 and 108.  None of these correspond to the above quote in any way.

I did find a verbatim recitation of the above quote ("The church does not take a position on who the Lamanites were, nor where any groups in the Americas or the Pacific originated") on an anonymous Reddit essay published five years ago: Changing the Narrative: Lamanite Identity Church History Topic

An excerpt:

Item #3 above corresponds with the FB meme.  It is apparently an attempt to summarize the Church's article, Lamanite Identity.  Particularly, this bit (quoted above) :

So we have

• A) the Church's Lamanite Identity article, which is heavily distorted and mischaracterized and very loosely paraphrased in 
• B) an anonymous Reddit essay, from which a line is extracted and quoted in
• C) the above Facebook meme, which falsely attributes the statement as
• D) a verbatim quote from Saints, Volume 1, The Standard of Truth.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

Setting the misleading quote marks and source aside, do you disagree with statement? - "The church does not take a position on who the Lamanites were, nor where any groups in the Americas or the Pacific originated"

 

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

I just saw this on Facebook:

 

From the FB post on this: 

"Literally."  Huh.

Anyway, the above quote on the right is authentic, coming from a 1971 Ensign article by Pres. Spencer W. Kimball, then the Acting President of the Q12.

The quote on the left is proving tricky to track down.  It is enclosed by quotations marks, with no ellipses or brackets or anything, so it would seem to be a verbatim quote.  And the wording above it heavily implies that it comes from the Church's publication, Saints, Volume 1, The Standard of Truth, 1815–1846.  Per the online index, there are references to "Lamanite" on pages 61–62, 65, 72 and 108.  None of these correspond to the above quote in any way.

I did find a verbatim recitation of the above quote ("The church does not take a position on who the Lamanites were, nor where any groups in the Americas or the Pacific originated") on an anonymous Reddit essay published five years ago: Changing the Narrative: Lamanite Identity Church History Topic

An excerpt:

Item #3 above corresponds with the FB meme.  It is apparently an attempt to summarize the Church's article, Lamanite Identity.  Particularly, this bit (quoted above) :

So we have

• A) the Church's Lamanite Identity article, which is heavily distorted and mischaracterized and very loosely paraphrased in 
• B) an anonymous Reddit essay, from which a line is extracted and quoted in
• C) the above Facebook meme, which falsely attributes the statement as
• D) a verbatim quote from Saints, Volume 1, The Standard of Truth.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

And this is why the church cannot stand without an understanding of how both can and ARE true.

We must understand post modernism.  

There are many ways to learn and believe that ideas are all interpretations and interpretations are TOOLS.  You don't use a saw to do the job of a wrench. 

Everything we know derives from belief in either hearsay- the philosophies and constructs of men- or personal experience.

History is hearsay. It cannot be otherwise. It could be true or false, but none of it is admissible when it's interpretation affects one's earthly OR spiritual life.

We are told as children not to touch a hot stove- that's hearsay. When we touch it anyway, we have direct experience- and THAT is what creates certainty. 

Spiritual confirmation must come by the spirit, not anybody's hearsay.

We are here in this world to touch a lot of stoves. 

It's the only way we really learn "truth"

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

Setting the misleading quote marks and source aside, do you disagree with statement? - "The church does not take a position on who the Lamanites were, nor where any groups in the Americas or the Pacific originated"

 

That's the job of anthropologists if you ask me.  We learn we are all brothers and sisters in our hearts.

Which is most important?

Does anthropology show us that the BOM is true?  Heck no, it's the heart!

You don't need a hunting knife to spread butter.

 

[smac97]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

Setting the misleading quote marks and source aside, do you disagree with statement? - "The church does not take a position on who the Lamanites were, nor where any groups in the Americas or the Pacific originated"

Yes.  It substantially errs in its absolutism, while at the same time faulting Pres. Kimball for being absolutist (which I don't think he was).

Thanks,

-Smac

[pogi]

9 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  It substantially errs in its absolutism, while at the same time faulting Pres. Kimball for being absolutist (which I don't think he was).

Thanks,

-Smac

I am confused by this.  How is the one statement "absolutist" but not Pres. Kimballs?   It seems strange to disregard the statement outright for erroring in being absolutist by suggesting that the church takes no official position on the issue (which it doesn't).   Not taking a position is anything but absolutist.   Unless you have statements from the church suggesting otherwise, the statement is true based on what I have seen published by the church below.   Kimball's quote seems much more appropriately termed as "absolutism"

"The term laminates includes all Indians and Indian mixtures such as..."  Sounds pretty absolutist to me.  I'm not sure how one could perceive this as a relative statement. 

Quote

 

Just as the history of the northern ten tribes of Israel after their exile in Assyria is a matter of speculation rather than knowledge, the history of the Lamanites after the close of the Book of Mormon record is a matter of speculation.

The Church asserts that all members are part of the covenant house of Israel either by descent or adoption but does not take a position on the specific geography of the Book of Mormon or claim complete knowledge about the origins of any specific modern group in the Americas or the Pacific.

 

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/lamanite-identity?lang=eng

 

Should we disregard this statement by the church for erring in absolutism?

 

[pogi]

43 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

That's the job of anthropologists if you ask me.  We learn we are all brothers and sisters in our hearts.

Which is most important?

Does anthropology show us that the BOM is true?  Heck no, it's the heart!

You don't need a hunting knife to spread butter.

 

I agree.  Which is why I appreciate the current approach of the church in not taking any official position on the subject.  It is also why Pres Kimball's statement doesn't sit well with me.  No biggie for me personally though, I know they are fallible.  This is just one example of that. 

Edited May 3 by pogi

[mfbukowski]

47 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  It substantially errs in its absolutism, while at the same time faulting Pres. Kimball for being absolutist (which I don't think he was).

Thanks,

-Smac

I think one can be an "absolutist" in one context but not in another.

Murder is always wrong, but when does it become "manslaughter"?

That has been precisely defined by the law, but in virtually everything else in life, we get to judge what are "facts" and what are not!

[CV75]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I think one can be an "absolutist" in one context but not in another.

Murder is always wrong, but when does it become "manslaughter"?

That has been precisely defined by the law, but in virtually everything else in life, we get to judge what are "facts" and what are not!

From my experience, I think some people experience President Kimball as absolutist and others not! 

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  It substantially errs in its absolutism, while at the same time faulting Pres. Kimball for being absolutist (which I don't think he was).

This will involve some fun Cirque du Soleil mental gymnastics. Where’s my popcorn?

[rpn]

Did anyone look in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism to see what was published there on the topic?

[smac97]

5 hours ago, pogi said:

I am confused by this.  How is the one statement "absolutist" but not Pres. Kimballs?   

In a few ways.  Pres. Kimball was speaking in broad terms of how "{t}he term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as the Polynesians, the Guatemalans, the Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo, and others."  

In contrast the other statement is not only a fabrication falsely attributed to the Church, it is far more declaratory and "absolutist" in its content, claiming that "{t}he church does not take a position on who the Lamanites were" (when in actuality, it does, just not with much precision) "nor where any groups in the Americas or the Pacific originated" (also not true, as the Church's "Lamanite Identity" article affirms the Book of Mormon narrative about "Lamanites" as part of "yet other peoples, notably the native peoples of the Americas, as lost sheep of the house of Israel" (which, I think, necessarily contemplates Moroni's explanation of the "book" as "giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang").

Pres. Kimball we elsewhere fairly clear that he did not believe the peoples described in the Book of Mormon were the sole precolumbian inhabitants of the Americas.  See, e.g., here:(from a 1967 address at BYU) :

Quote

The Indian is a Lamanite. There are South American, Central American, Mexican, Polynesian, and other Lamanites; running into millions who are not specifically called “Indians,” though they are related Lamanites. The Lamanites are a mixture of many; undoubtedly there is in their veins the blood of Nephi, Joseph, and Jacob, as well as that of Laman, Lemuel, and Sam; also of the Mulekites of Judah. 

They are not Orientals. They are from the Near East. The Twelve Apostles who were associated with the prophet Joseph proclaimed this to the world. Quoting: “He [the Lord] has revealed the origin and the records of the aboriginal tribes of America, and their future destiny. -And we know it” (Proclamation of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints - April 6 and October 22, 1845).

We also bear testimony that the Indians (so-called) of North and South America are a remnant of the tribes of Israel. Through the centuries, movements, discovery, exploration, settlement and colonization of the people of this land, it is not impossible that there could have seeped across the Bering Strait a little Oriental blood, as claimed by some people; and possibly a little Norse blood may have crossed the north Atlantic. But, basically, these Lamanites, including the Indians, are the descendants of Lehi, who left Jerusalem 600 years B.C. In a general sense, we are the Gentiles, having come from Gentile nations. The name “Indians” given to the early possessors of the Americas by Columbus. As they intermarried with the invading European conquerors, and nations were formed, they became Mexicans, Peruvians, Bolivians, Guatemalans and others; but the correct name for all the descendants of Lehi and Ishmael is Lamanite. This is an honorable name. It was the lord who so designated it . Every descendant of Lehi should proudly say “I am a Lamanite. And I am proud of my heritage.”

With 5+ decades of advancements in genetics and such, the Church has taken a broader approach to this issue, see here:

Quote

The evidence assembled to date suggests that the majority of Native Americans carry largely Asian DNA. Scientists theorize that in an era that predated Book of Mormon accounts, a relatively small group of people migrated from northeast Asia to the Americas by way of a land bridge that connected Siberia to Alaska. These people, scientists say, spread rapidly to fill North and South America and were likely the primary ancestors of modern American Indians.

The Book of Mormon provides little direct information about cultural contact between the peoples it describes and others who may have lived nearby. Consequently, most early Latter-day Saints assumed that Near Easterners or West Asians like Jared, Lehi, Mulek, and their companions were the first or the largest or even the only groups to settle the Americas. Building upon this assumption, critics insist that the Book of Mormon does not allow for the presence of other large populations in the Americas and that, therefore, Near Eastern DNA should be easily identifiable among modern native groups.

The Book of Mormon itself, however, does not claim that the peoples it describes were either the predominant or the exclusive inhabitants of the lands they occupied. In fact, cultural and demographic clues in its text hint at the presence of other groups. At the April 1929 general conference, President Anthony W. Ivins of the First Presidency cautioned: “We must be careful in the conclusions that we reach. The Book of Mormon … does not tell us that there was no one here before them [the peoples it describes]. It does not tell us that people did not come after.”

I think many of the early leaders of the Church, and even many later ones, imposed a "Lehi et al. were the numerical majority of the ancient inhabitants" reading of Lehi's party.  So Pres. Kimball's statement that they (the ancestor's of today's "Lamanites" were "not Orientals" is arguably at odds with the above essay, which concedes that "the majority of Native Americans carry largely Asian DNA," and that "{s}cientists theorize that in an era that predated Book of Mormon accounts, a relatively small group of people migrated from northeast Asia to the Americas by way of a land bridge that connected Siberia to Alaska," and that "{t}hese people, scientists say, spread rapidly to fill North and South America and were likely the primary ancestors of modern American Indians."  Nevertheless, even on this point Pres. Kimball was not absolutist, as he expressly acknowledged that "it is not impossible that there could have seeped across the Bering Strait a little Oriental blood, as claimed by some people; and possibly a little Norse blood may have crossed the north Atlantic."  Pres. Kimball was off as a matter of degree, not kind.

From FAIR:

Quote

Contrary to the claims of those who attempt to use DNA evidence to discredit the Book of Mormon, some readers and leaders reconsidered these ideas. Some are fond of citing Church leaders such as Spencer W. Kimball, who was certainly a powerful advocate for the Amerindians or “Lamanites." President Kimball often made statements which supported the view that Lehi was the exclusive progenitor of all native Americans. However, many apostles and seventies have made many statements which differ from critics' understanding of the matter, taught them in General Conference, and the Church has published such perspectives in their magazines, study guides, and manuals. The Church’s university has passed them on to their students for generations. The Church’s official spokespeople disclaim the interpretation which critics insist we must hold.

When asked about the Church’s official position on this matter by a writer, a Church spokesman said:

As to whether these were the first inhabitants…we don't have a position on that. Our scripture does not try to account for any other people who may have lived in the New World before, during or after the days of the Jaredites and the Nephites, and we don't have any official doctrine about who the descendants of the Nephites and the Jaredites are. Many Mormons believe that American Indians are descendants of the Lamanites [a division of the Nephites], but that's not in the scripture.^[5]

It is astonishing that critics do not realize that this puts a fairly “official” stamp of approval on this perspective—at the very least, it is hardly out of the ‘mainstream’ of Church thought to think that others besides Israelites make up modern Amerindians, and this perspective existed long before the DNA issue came to the fore.

The sticking point seems to be "exclusivity" as to the ancestors of the Lamanites (or, put another way, "absolutism").  Even though Pres. Kimball may have "often made statements which supported the view that Lehi was the exclusive progenitor of all native Americans," he elsewhere seemed to concede that they were not.

5 hours ago, pogi said:

It seems strange to disregard the statement outright for erroring in being absolutist by suggesting that the church takes no official position on the issue (which it doesn't).   

Yes, it does.  

If "the issue" is "who the Lamanites were" and "where any groups in the Americas or the Pacific originated," it most certainly does.  Per the "Lamanite Identity" article, the Church doesn't "take a position" on "specific geography of the Book of Mormon" and it does not "claim complete knowledge about the origins of any specific modern group in the Americas or the Pacific."

That said, the Church does take a position about Moroni's explanation of the "book" as "giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang."  And this: "The Book of Mormon invited readers to consider yet other peoples, notably the native peoples of the Americas, as lost sheep of the house of Israel and part of this covenant history."

5 hours ago, pogi said:

Not taking a position is anything but absolutist.

Pres. Kimball did not seem to take an "absolutist" position, whereas the fabricated post is absolutist.  That's my point.

5 hours ago, pogi said:

Unless you have statements from the church suggesting otherwise, the statement is true based on what I have seen published by the church below. 

"The statement" being . . . the one fabricated and falsely attributed to the Church by an anonymous Redditor?  

With respect, no, I don't think it is accurate.  

Thanks,

-Smac

[mfbukowski]

5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Where’s my popcorn?

I ate it.  Don't worry- I have everything under control.   😇

[pogi]

On 5/3/2023 at 8:26 PM, smac97 said:

With respect, no, I don't think it is accurate.  

I think we can all agree that the meme fails miserably in attempting to attribute this quote to The Standard of Truth.   It clearly took the quote from the Reddit essay which was attempting to paraphrase the church quote from the Lamanite Identity article.  If your point is merely to point out the lazy and sloppy scholarship of a meme - job well done.  However, the meme would have worked just as well using the direct quote from the Lamanite Identity article.  That is my point. 

The narrative has changed (thank goodness!).  This is troubling for some people to see the words of a prophet in disagreement with the modern narrative of the church.  It is effective with people who believe that prophets can't, or shouldn't, make mistakes.  It is less effective with those who understand that that church and prophets have made mistakes and have evolved away from false claims of Lamanite heritage.  

Edited May 5 by pogi

[Benjamin McGuire]

@smac97

The quote on the left comes from a 2018 blog post, (not really a blog post, more of a multipart manifesto of sorts) which derives the statement from the LDS Church's statement on the Lamanites. This is taken from that first link:

Quote

 "Just as the history of the northern ten tribes of Israel after their exile in Assyria is a matter of speculation rather than knowledge, the history of the Lamanites after the close of the Book of Mormon record is a matter of speculation. The Church asserts that all members are part of the covenant house of Israel either by descent or adoption but does not take a position on the specific geography of the Book of Mormon or claim complete knowledge about the origins of any specific modern group in the Americas or the Pacific.  Whatever the historical particulars, the Church continues its efforts to help realize the hopes of Book of Mormon prophets that the covenants of the Lord might be extended to all the lost sheep of Israel."
 
The preceding "Lamanite Identity" essay paragraph declares that the Mormon Church does not take a position on who the Lamanites were, after the close of the Book of Mormon record, nor where any groups in the Americas or the Pacific originated.

You can see that there are two ellipses here, that I have indicated in the text above. I believe this is probably the original source, but I am not going to take the time to do an analysis between this and the reddit comments.

Edited May 5 by Benjamin McGuire

[Hamilton Porter]

You're a Lamanite of you're at least part indigenous and you identify as one. We own that word, we decide how to define it.