Don't write or call the GAs.....

[_Trevor]

Don't write or call us GAs. We prefer writing and speaking platitudes on occasion to interacting with the members of our Church. We generally find the people who buy into our malarkey really uncool to hang out with.

[_Jason Bourne]

Today in Sacrament Meeting another letter from the first presidency was read once again reiterating the request that members not call or write leaders with questions concerning doctrine.

Its language was stronger than I remember the last few letters with the same message.

I wonder when the church will create some sort of document or resource to help members in knowing what is or is not doctrine.

FAIR is putting together quite a resource of opinions regarding LDS doctrine, and there is the LDS encyclopedia full of various opinions, and there are resources in the scriptures like the dictionary that are opinion, and of course the infamous Mormon Doctrine that is not Mormon Doctrine, but none of these are anything other than opinion.

It just seems like it would be helpful to members to actually know and/or understand what is actually LDS doctrine.

OTOH, it sometimes seems that so long as someone says they believe the church is true, that it doesn't matter what they believe.

~dancer~

One of the interesting twists I noted on this letter was that it said id things cannot be resolved on the ward or stake level the SP can then communicate with the GAs on the issue.

I agree that for doctrinal questions some sort of outline would be helpful.

[_harmony]

Not having attended SM yesterday, I didn't hear this read. However, it doesn't surprise me. What surprises me is that they actually put it in writing. It does no good to write to the CEO's and BOD's of any other giant business. Why would anyone expect a response from the head of General Motors or Nabisco?

The church is moving further and further from being a church and closer and closer to being a business. This is simply one more giant step towards being a business. The welfare of the Saints themselves is of no concern to the 15.

On another note, one of my DIL's was called as Relief Society president. Lord, have mercy.

[_bcspace]

The thing is, you believe you know doctrine but as you know, others who believe they know doctrine do not agree with your particular interpretation of doctrine. In other words, all sorts of believers claim to know what is doctrine but their ideas of doctrine are dissimilar.

Doesn't matter. The Church has clearly stated what is and is not doctrine, therefore if any of us conflict with that, we are wrong.

In addition there is quite a bit of disagreement as to where one can even locate or identify what is official doctrine.

There are indeed those who prefer to not see the Church's clear statements on doctrine. I think it's because it ruins their gospel hobbies.

You think an anonymous fuzzy statement on a church website is the official word on where doctrine is located,

What 'fuzzy' statement is that?

other believers completely disagree with you.

Who and why does it matter?

And, as I have pointed out previously, stating that doctrine is located in the scriptures or manuals isn't much of a clue.

Then you agree it's not fuzzy. It's a huge break for you. What could be better than pointing to an official publication saying "It says right here"......?

The scriptures and manuals are filled with all sorts of things that are obviously not considered doctrine.

Such as? Obviously if it states in a doctrinal work that something is not doctrine then the doctrine IS that it's not doctrine. Quite simple really.....

[_neworder]

If one can't ask the GA's then who can they ask? These people are the leaders of our church. They should tell us what the doctrine is. I guess that means they will only accept nice letters and calls of how amazing they are. Hmmm...

You really want to know who they can ask?

It is God himself.

But this is where the problem comes in. God tells people different things.

Even the scriptures them self is not the "ultimate source of knowledge" according to
http://newsroom.LDS.org/ldsnewsroom/eng ... ristianity

“The scriptures are not the ultimate source of knowledge for Latter-day Saints. They are manifestations of the ultimate source. The ultimate source of knowledge and authority for a Latter-day Saint is the living God. The communication of those gifts comes from God as living, vibrant, divine revelation.”

according to this link that BCSPACE points out, what a prophet might say is doctrine, is only doctrine if the scriptures already say so.
http://www.newsroom.LDS.org/ldsnewsroom ... n-doctrine

"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."

So the structure works like this.

-Personal Revelation (What God tells you)
---Scriptures (What the Big 15 believe should be scripture)
------Teachings of Prophets (General Conference Talks, etc.)

Of course this is what they are saying right now as of April 14th, 2008.

According to how this is set up, what LDS prophets say is really not a big deal anyway. They are on the bottom of the totem pole.

It gets confusing though because sometimes a prophet may say that they Trump scriptures according to a talk by Ezra Taft Benson when he was the Prophet at the time.

Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet

Second: The living prophet is more vital to us than the Standard Works.

President Wilford Woodruff tells of an interesting incident that occurred in the days of the Prophet Joseph Smith:

“I will refer to a certain meeting I attended in the town of Kirtland in my early days. At that meeting some remarks were made that have been made here today, with regard to the living prophets and with regard to the written word of God. The same principle was presented, although not as extensively as it has been here, when a leading man in the Church got up and talked upon the subject, and said: ‘You have got the word of God before you here in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; you have the written word of God, and you who give revelations should give revelations according to those books, as what is written in those books is the word of God. We should confine ourselves to them.’

“When he concluded, Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, ‘Brother Brigham I want you to go to the podium and tell us your views with regard to the living oracles and the written word of God.’ Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: ‘There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day. And now,’ said he, ‘when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.’ That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation; ‘Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth.’ ” (Conference Report, October 1897, pp. 18–19.)

LDS folks do share a lot of the same doctrine as long as it remains very simple. Just like a tree trunk it starts shooting off in different directions the higher you go up the tree.

Scriptures, GAs, Prophets are just spring boards. Like the first Quote says "The ultimate source of knowledge and authority for a Latter-day Saint is the living God." But if God tells me something that goes against What Scripture Says or What Prophets have said, then a majority of the LDS will believe that God really didn't tell me even though I totally believe it.

So in Short, the GA's should just have a form letter that is sent out to people who ask Doctrinally questions that simply states "Ask God".

[_Jason Bourne]

I wonder when the church will create some sort of document or resource to help members in knowing what is or is not doctrine.

Already done. It's just a click away.

Let's read BC's referered NEWS release (which does not meet its own definition of doctrine):

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.

Now BC himself ignores this because there is an official FP statement that declares evolution false. This statement also would make the recent proclamation on the family doctrine which some apologists say is not.

But I will tell you I likve this statement. It is a good guideline. If the FP put it out as official then it would have meaning. But as it is only a news release it has not authority.

[_bcspace]

Let's read BC's referered NEWS release (which does not meet its own definition of doctrine):

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.

Now BC himself ignores this because there is an official FP statement that declares evolution false.

First, I will once again (ad nauseum) put my money where my mouth is and state that I accept all the FP statements as doctrine including the 1909 statement.

Second, Jason, Tarski, Tal, etc. have not been willing to point out specifically in any FP or otherwise doctrinal statement where they think my theory is in conflict.

This statement also would make the recent proclamation on the family doctrine which some apologists say is not.

It would. Of course I would like a CFR on which apologists don't accept it as such......

But I will tell you I likve this statement.

Finally some reason?

It is a good guideline. If the FP put it out as official then it would have meaning. But as it is only a news release it has not authority.

CFR. I don't see the word "guideline' in there. It is officially published by the Church in the name of the Church. It sumarizes what has been taught about what doctrine is for decades and is rooted in D&C 107. This is not new and it is authoritative.

[_Jason Bourne]

Not having attended SM yesterday, I didn't hear this read. However, it doesn't surprise me. What surprises me is that they actually put it in writing. It does no good to write to the CEO's and BOD's of any other giant business. Why would anyone expect a response from the head of General Motors or Nabisco?

The church is moving further and further from being a church and closer and closer to being a business. This is simply one more giant step towards being a business. The welfare of the Saints themselves is of no concern to the 15.

I think you are being overly harsh. The Church is large and the leaders are few. They do have a lot of things to do both administratively and on the religious side too. I think saying they want you to try to solve it locally but if you cannot contact us through your SP is appropriate.

On another note, one of my DIL's was called as Relief Society president. Lord, have mercy.

On her or her ward ;-)

[_Trevor]

The church is moving further and further from being a church and closer and closer to being a business. This is simply one more giant step towards being a business. The welfare of the Saints themselves is of no concern to the 15.

I get the feeling it always was a business. But you are right that the cold corporate image is quite prominent today.

[_cinepro]

From a practical standpoint, I can understand why the apostles don't want 100,000 people bugging them about the location of Kolob or the number of Cumorah's. But at the same time, they can't just make a "Mormon FAQ" on the website where the clearly (and officially) answer the most commonly asked questions.

So they can leave it to their untrained lay-clergy to make it up as they go along.