DiscussMormonism.com

BC Space, our residential MDB LDS Doctrine expert proclaims the following:

bcspace wrote:

I'm tried to discover what is "official" Church doctrine since 1979. Does anybody know?

Yes. You could have studied Teaching, No Greater Call and a few other manuals or you could have served a mission or attended a teacher preparation class etc. etc. All the statements gleaned from those sources and put together shows that what the Church publishes is official doctrine. I and everyone else (active and believing) in the Church maintained that for years before this affirming and summary statement came out:

Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.
Approaching Mormon Doctrine

Many of your fellow critics, as well as apologists, with axes to grind or pet theories to protect, despite their grumbling, are finally accepting this principle that the Church itself accepted 30-40+ years ago. The foundational doctrine behind this has been around since 1835 (D&C 107) in which we see that the FP and Qo12 are equal in authority and hence all of them must agree before something becomes doctrine.

Any critic who does not accept this always finds himself talking around LDS members instead of to them.

Liz: Idea; you should pin this post (not this thread) at the top because this question keeps coming up. Feel free to allow other comments to be made.

BC is right that this question is asked repeatedly. I will pin this thread for a week. I challenge all of us to try and find an official Church statement clarifying this. The winner gets a party in the Goddess Suite with his/her choice of food and activity. :-)

This should help:

I challenge all of us to try and find an official Church statement clarifying this

Approaching Mormon Doctrine is an official statement. In fact THE official and definitive statement on this issue if you are looking for clarity, whether the customary clarity or the new and improved kind of clarity.

I would like cheesecake (the 5 packages of cream cheese kind, not the three or the one) served at my party please.

Why is it important to teach the doctrine?

Jesus commanded us to “teach one another the doctrine of the kingdom” (D&C 88:77). Doctrine is the word of God as found in the scriptures and the teachings of latter-day prophets and apostles. The word of God has power to change our lives.

Teachers must ensure that they keep the doctrine pure by teaching gospel truths as the Lord has revealed them. You can do this by teaching from the scriptures and the words of the latter-day prophets. President Ezra Taft Benson said, “Always remember, there is no satisfactory substitute for the scriptures and the words of the living prophets. These should be your original sources” (The Gospel Teacher and His Message [1976], 6).

Also make sure that you use Church-produced materials when you teach. This will help you keep the doctrine pure. Avoid speculation and private interpretations.

http://LDS.org/service/teaching-the-gospel/principles-and-methods-of-teaching/teach-the-doctrine?lang=eng&query=%22teach+the+doctrine%22

Question: How do you keep the doctrine pure?
Answer: Use Church-Produced materials.

Notice the Dallin H. Oaks video on this page: "A superior teacher of the Gospel will teach from the prescribed course material"

Preparation

1.Prayerfully study the scripture passages in this lesson. Seek to apply them to the purpose of the lesson.

2.Study the section in this book titled “Teach the Doctrine” (pages 49–59) and the following in the “Gospel Teaching and Leadership” section of the Church Handbook of Instructions: “Teach the Saving Doctrines and Ordinances of the Gospel” (page 301), “Teach from the Scriptures and the Teachings of Latter-day Prophets” (page 302), and “Use Church-Approved Lesson Materials” (page 304).

3.Invite a class member or another member of the ward to come to class prepared to talk about how learning a specific doctrine of the gospel has influenced his or her life.

4.If current Church-produced lesson manuals are available, bring a few of them to class.

5. Before class, write the following on the chalkboard:

“I give unto you a commandment that you shall teach one another the doctrine of the kingdom” (D&C 88:77).

http://LDS.org/manual/teaching-no-greater-call-a-resource-guide-for-gospel-teaching/lesson-4-teach-the-doctrine?lang=eng&query=%22teach+the+doctrine%22

The only way to be sure you are expressing the doctrine of the LDS Church is to use Church published materials.

bcspace wrote:The only way to be sure you are expressing the doctrine of the LDS Church is to use Church published materials.

Be careful!


from Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young - Introduction

The first section consists of extracts from Brigham Young’s sermons to the early Saints. Each statement has been referenced, and the original spelling and punctuation have been preserved; however, the sources cited will not be readily available to most members. These original sources are not necessary to have in order to effectively study or teach from this book. Members need not purchase additional references and commentaries to study or teach these chapters.

from Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph F. Smith - Historical Summary

... in order to put the teachings in a historical framework, the following list is provided to summarize some of the milestones in his life that have most immediate relationship to his teachings. This summary omits some important events in his personal life, including his marriages (plural marriage was being practiced in the Church at that time)...

Read: plural marriage was being practiced by Joseph F. Smith.
The official site says nothing about his wives.
See http://LDS.org/churchhistory/presidents ... opic=facts


by the way
from http://www.josephfsmith.org/node/44 :

JULINA
I am Julina Lambson Smith. I was born June 18, 1849. My mother and father arrived in the Great Salt Lake Valley in Sept. 1847.
...
SARAH
I am Sarah Ellen Richards Smith, daughter of Pres. Willard Richards and Sarah Longstroth. My father was a counselor to Pres. Brigham Young, and was with the Prophet Joseph Smith and Hyrum when they were martyred.
...
EDNA
I am Edna Lambson Smith. I was born March 3, 1851. You have already heard that I am a younger sister of Julina and my early home was very humble, almost what you might call poor in worldly fares.
...
ALICE
I am Alice Ann Kimball. My first home was on 3rd North between 2nd and 3rd West. My father was Pres. Heber C. Kimball and my mother's name was Ann Alice Gheen.
...
MARY
I am Mary Schwartz Smith. My mother was Agnes Taylor, youngest sister of Pres. John Taylor, and my father was William Schwartz. He was a miller by occupation. He was a German immigrant
...

If the page http://LDS.org/churchhistory/presidents/leaders.jsp says nothing about any wife, that president was polygamous.
Check it!

It is simple, really.

If it is politically in favor for the cult, it is doctrine.

If it is not, it is not doctrine.

If politics change, then previous doctrine is no longer doctrine, that person was speaking as a man.

Any member is free to consider whatever is doctrine as long as they keep it to themselves.

Most chapel Mormons will have no concept of what really is doctrine until they are corrected by the Mormon Apologists. And the Mormon Apologists will correct them in abrupt, abusive, blunt and insulting ways - never truly revealing what really is doctrine - but turning around and pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person suggesting what is doctrine (hence the concept of the crappy or ignorant member).

Most chapel Mormons have no concept of questioning anything that may or may not be doctrine. Questioning doctrine is highly discouraged as temple worthiness requires complete obedience to cult leaders. Mormon doctrine to chapel Mormons is the QUAD, the Ensign and the current (and only the current) correlated curriculum teaching manual.

The cult leaders remain silent on doctrine. I don't know that we teach that. Those were little flecks of history. What is no longer politically in favor is omitted from any current published materials (including cult websites and those maintained by MoreGood and the Apologists). Only the Apologists argue the validity of what is real doctrine and even that is vague and filled with 10 dollar words and pompous asshattery (see Dr. Peterson).

You want real doctrine in Mormonism? I will give you the only real doctrine Mormonism has:

Pay your tithing. Pray to the Mormon God. Obey your priesthood leaders.

Pay, Pray, Obey.

bcspace wrote:The only way to be sure you are expressing the doctrine of the LDS Church is to use Church published materials.

Just to be clear, bcspace, it isn't that every declarative sentence in Church published materials expresses doctrine, right?

bcspace wrote:
Approaching Mormon Doctrine is an official statement. In fact THE official and definitive statement on this issue if you are looking for clarity, whether the customary clarity or the new and improved kind of clarity.

I would like cheesecake (the 5 packages of cream cheese kind, not the three or the one) served at my party please.

While the news release may be considered a commentary on doctrine and encapsulate how the Church believes we should approach doctrine I think it silly to call a news release THE OFFICIAL AND DEFINITIVE STATEMENT on this issue. Really? A news release is the end all of end all to define LDS Doctrine? Well that works till someone else comes along and released something different.

The problem with what really constitutes LDS doctrine is the commentary of what is and is not has been all over the place. You have passages in D&C 107 which talk about who has what authority. There has been a process for canonizing doctrine for almost from the beginning. But what is doctrinal outside the canon has been all over the place.

The news release is a good one. How about the FP and Q of 12 issue it and present if for sustaining vote before the Church. Then all question on what constitutes doctrine will be settled. Till then it is still less settled.

Be careful!

Of what? The first quote especially reinforces what I said.

The only way to be sure you are expressing the doctrine of the LDS Church is to use Church published materials.

Just to be clear, bcspace, it isn't that every declarative sentence in Church published materials expresses doctrine, right?

Being part of a declarative sentence has nothing to do with it. If something published is not doctrine, it will say so. There is also context: If a publication quotes an apostle or prophet saying "In my opinion, such and such is true", then the doctrine is that such such is the opinion of said apostle or prophet, not that such and such is doctrine.

While the news release may be considered a commentary on doctrine and encapsulate how the Church believes we should approach doctrine I think it silly to call a news release THE OFFICIAL AND DEFINITIVE STATEMENT on this issue. Really? A news release is the end all of end all to define LDS Doctrine?

Really. It summarizes everything taught. The site is published by the Church. Of much lesser importance you'll note that the word "official" is located on the banner. And then you might want to ask yourself if the Church teaches something different to it's members. You will not find anything to that effect.

Well that works till someone else comes along and released something different.

Non-sequitur. The Church approves it's publications.

So when BKP stated in a conference talk that the Proclamation on the Family was doctrine it was in fact not. It was demoted in the printed version to be a guide. So it's not exactly what the FP/Q12 say that may be doctrine, it is what is printed.

Just to make things clear.