DiscussMormonism.com

I noticed that BC has a link in his signature line to the Church's press release of last year explaining what constitutes "doctrine" of the Church. I am sure this must have been asked before, but it seems under the press release's own description of what doctrine is, the press release itself IS NOT doctrine. So are we not simply left without any "doctrinal" description of what is in fact "doctrine"?

The release is here

mms wrote:I noticed that BC has a link in his signature line to the Church's press release of last year "explaining what constitutes "doctrine" of the Church. I am sure this must have been asked before, but it seems under the press release's own description of what doctrine is, the press release itself IS NOT doctrine. So are we not simply left without any "doctrinal" description of what is in fact "doctrine"?

The release is here:

http://www.newsroom.LDS.org/ldsnewsroom ... n-doctrine

Yup. Doctrine is in the canon. Everything else published by the church is considered "consistent" with doctrine, but cannot itself be doctrine. And thus, the statement itself is not doctrinal or binding, for that matter.

I suggest we give up the whole idea of 'official doctrine'.

But we cannot give up the "true doctrine" question. Here's why: In a Commentary at the Church Newsroom a couple of days ago, entitled "The Mormon Religious Experience", we read:

Furthermore, religious experience is too varied and indefinable for systematic theology to fully account for. At the same time, it is not simply relative to the passing whims of each individual believer. For Latter-day Saints, it must be founded on revealed truth. Emphasizing the important role that doctrine plays in guiding religious experience, President Boyd K. Packer of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles encouraged Latter-day Saints to internalize that truth: “True doctrine, understood, changes attitudes and behavior.”

The Commentary is here.

So we are to undertand "true doctrine" to change attitudes and behavior, but we are on our own (with the exception of a press release that most members do not know about) to figure out just where that doctrine may be found, but we should be sure not to rely on our individual "passing whims" about what may or may not constitute doctrine. So what is this "true doctrine" and when you tell me, are you relying on your own passing whims about what it is?

I suppose a fair response to the question of "What is true Mormon doctrine" (possibly asked by someone who wants to follow Elder Packer's advice about how to change attitudes and behavior) is to refer one to the press release about what consitutes Mormon doctrine with the caveat that the release itself does not consitute doctrine, so in the future we may be advised that it was wrong about what "true doctrine" is but living by it now won't hurt and we can just change things up if it changes later. Is that accurate?

Edit: But I guess Elder Packer's advice about using "true doctrine" to change is not necessarily "true doctrine" so maybe we do not need to know what "true doctrine" is after all.

mms wrote:So we are to undertand "true doctrine" to change attitudes and behavior, but we are own (with the exception of a press release that most members do not know about) to figure out just where that doctrine may be found, but we should be sure not to rely on our individual "passing whims" about what may or may not constitute doctrine. So what is this "true doctrine" and when you tell me, are you relying on your own passing whims about what it is?

That tired old obnoxious Holy Ghost thing we harp on about teaches what is and is not truth.

The Nehor wrote:

mms wrote:So we are to undertand "true doctrine" to change attitudes and behavior, but we are own (with the exception of a press release that most members do not know about) to figure out just where that doctrine may be found, but we should be sure not to rely on our individual "passing whims" about what may or may not constitute doctrine. So what is this "true doctrine" and when you tell me, are you relying on your own passing whims about what it is?

That tired old obnoxious Holy Ghost thing we harp on about teaches what is and is not truth.

Which one? The Holy Ghost that guided Nephi to kill Laban, or the one that guided the Laffertys to kill a baby?

Look at this catch all excuse from that LDS newroom page:

Journalists, academics and laymen alike are encouraged to pursue their inquiries into the Church by recognizing the broad and complex context within which its doctrines have been declared, in a spirit of reason and good will.

Why not just tell them to read the Book of Mormon/D&C/PoGP/declarations?

The Nehor wrote:

mms wrote:So we are to undertand "true doctrine" to change attitudes and behavior, but we are own (with the exception of a press release that most members do not know about) to figure out just where that doctrine may be found, but we should be sure not to rely on our individual "passing whims" about what may or may not constitute doctrine. So what is this "true doctrine" and when you tell me, are you relying on your own passing whims about what it is?

That tired old obnoxious Holy Ghost thing we harp on about teaches what is and is not truth.

But wouldn't that be included in the category of individual "passing whims" that we were told not to rely on by Elder Packer in his non-doctrinal statement above?

Runtu wrote:Which one? The Holy Ghost that guided Nephi to kill Laban, or the one that guided the Laffertys to kill a baby?

The one you find that starts leading you bit by bit to truth and is right all the time.

The Nehor wrote:

Runtu wrote:Which one? The Holy Ghost that guided Nephi to kill Laban, or the one that guided the Laffertys to kill a baby?

The one you find that starts leading you bit by bit to truth and is right all the time.

I'm sure the Laffertys thought theirs was always right.