FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Detailed response to CES Letter, Other
|
Response to "Other Concerns & Questions"
| [[../Scriptures Concerns & Questions|Scriptures Concerns & Questions]] | A FAIR Analysis of:
[[../|Letter to a CES Director]] |
[[../Conclusion|Conclusion]] |
- Response to section: 2013 Official Declaration 2 Header Update Dishonesty
- Response to section: "Zina Diantha Huntington Young"
- Response to section: "Brigham Young Sunday School Manual"
- Response to section: "The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy"
- Response to section: "Church Finances"
- Response to section: "Tithing"
- Response to section: "Names of the Church"
- Response to section: "Some things that are true are not very useful"
- Response to section: "Criticizing leaders"
- Response to section: "the scary internet"
- Response to section: "Going after members who publish or share their questions, concerns, and doubts"
- Response to section: Strengthening the Church Members Committee
- Response to section: "When the prophet speaks the debate is over"
2013 Official Declaration 2 Header Update Dishonesty
"Zina Diantha Huntington Young"
The circumstances of the plural marriage of Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs to Joseph Smith, Jr.
Summary: Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs was sealed to Joseph Smith while she was already carrying the child of her husband Henry Jacobs at the time. Why would Joseph be sealed to the wife of someone who was not only married to someone else, but pregnant with her husband's child?
Jump to Subtopic:
- Question: Why would Joseph be sealed to the wife of someone who was not only married to someone else, but pregnant with her husband's child?
- Question: Did Joseph Smith and Brigham Young steal Henry Jacobs' family?
- Question: What did the husband of Zina D. Huntington know about her sealing to Joseph Smith for eternity?
- Question: Did Brigham Young tell Henry Jacobs in front of hundreds of people that he needed to find another wife?
- Allen Wyatt, "Zina and Her Men: An Examination of the Changing Marital State of Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs Smith Young"
"Brigham Young Sunday School Manual"
Life and Character |
|
Youth |
|
Revelations and the Church |
|
Prophetic Statements |
|
Society |
|
Plural marriage (polygamy) |
|
Death |
Teachings |
|
History |
|
Race |
|
Critics |
Did Brigham Young and Joseph Smith say that polygamists were allowed to go beyond normal bounds of social interaction?
Joseph’s point is clear—men, like Brigham, who have reached a certain degree of faithfulness may be asked to do even more difficult things
It is claimed that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young admitted that the practice of polygamy meant they were "free to go beyond the normal 'bounds'" and "the normal rules governing social interaction had not applied to" Joseph.[1]
"Sometimes Joseph phrased the matter [of polygamy] in terms of being free to go beyond normal ‘bounds,’" G. D. Smith announces. As evidence, he presents Brigham Young’s account of being taught plural marriage. Brigham worried out loud that he might marry a second wife but then apostatize, leaving his plural family "worse off." In Brigham’s account, Joseph replied, "‘There are certain bounds set to men, and if a man is faithful and pure to these bounds, God will take him out of the world; if he sees him falter, he will take him to himself. You are past these bounds, Brigham, and you have this consolation.’ But Brigham indicated that he never had any fears of not being saved" (p. 364).[2]
Joseph’s point is clear—men, like Brigham, who have reached a certain degree of faithfulness may be asked to do even more difficult things. They need not fear that they will lose their eternal reward if they falter in these Abrahamic tasks, for God "will take him to himself" before they reap damnation. But G. D. Smith seems to be reading "bounds" in the sense "a limit by which any excursion is restrained; the limit of indulgence or desire."[3] This is why he conceives of it as being "free to go beyond normal bounds"—that is, beyond normal limits or restrictions. This is clearly not Brigham’s meaning. Bounds should be understood as "the line which comprehends the whole of any given object or space. It differs from boundary."[4] These bounds are not a limit beyond which one may not go—they encircle and enclose all that one must do. Before polygamy, Brigham had already striven to be faithful to the whole of his duty to God. Having done so, he would not be damned. But he was now being asked to fulfill a task not asked of most. The circumference of his bounds—or duties—was enlarged.
Brigham was thus past the bounds because he had done all that God required and more, not because he would violate moral limits
Unfortunately for G. D. Smith’s reading, polygamy cannot be "the bounds" referred to since Joseph told Brigham that he was already (before practicing polygamy) "past these bounds"—that is, the duties required of all men by God—and thus "you have this consolation." Brigham was thus past the bounds because he had done all that God required and more, not because he would violate moral limits. He had crossed the finish line; he had not gone "out of bounds" or offside.
G. D. Smith argues that Brigham gave "a telling concession that the normal rules governing social interaction had not applied to [Joseph] Smith as he set about instigating polygamy." But Brigham is not conceding anything like this. His "bounds" are not limits beyond which one may not go, but duties that one must fulfill before anything else might be asked. The bounds are divine duties, not social rules. G. D. Smith caps his argument by citing Brigham’s belief that Joseph "passed certain bounds . . . before certain revelations were given" (p. 365). Thus G. D. Smith wants to paint Brigham as admitting that polygamy required one to transgress social or moral boundaries.
Brigham was clearly making the same claim about Joseph that Joseph made about Brigham. In Brigham’s view, Joseph had not been challenged by the command to practice plural marriage until he had proved sufficiently faithful to guarantee his salvation. For its first practitioners, the challenge of plural marriage was such that a merciful God would not, in Brigham’s mind, require it of those whose salvation would be at risk in the event of their failure.
Brigham sees the matter as a command that he does not wish to fulfill—he would prefer to be dead—but that God confirms as his will
Immediately preceding the language quoted by G. D. Smith, Brigham tells an apostle that
the spiritual wife doctrine came upon me while abroad, in such a manner that I never forget. . . . Joseph said to me, ‘I command you to go and get another wife.’ I felt as if the grave was better for me than anything, but I was filled with the Holy Ghost, so that my wife and brother Kimball’s wife would upbraid me for lightness in those days. I could jump up and hollow [holler?]. My blood was as clear as West India rum, and my flesh was clear.[5]
In this passage, Brigham sees the matter as a command that he does not wish to fulfill—he would prefer to be dead—but that God confirms as his will. His bounds are duties to fulfill, not limits that he is now free to exceed.
Further evidence: Heber C. Kimball
That this reading is correct, and that G. D. Smith is in error, is confirmed by Heber C. Kimball’s similar doubts and reassurance: "Finally [Heber] was so tried that he went to Joseph and told him how he felt—that he was fearful if he took such a step [to practice plural marriage] he could not stand, but would be overcome. The Prophet, full of sympathy for him, went and inquired of the Lord. His answer was, ‘Tell him to go and do as he has been commanded, and if I see that there is any danger of his apostatizing, I will take him to myself.’"[6]
Kimball’s bounds—the commandments given him—had increased. But having already proved his faithfulness, he would not be damned for failure. Kimball apparently clung to this promise and would soon write to his wife that "my prayer is day by day that God would take me to Himself rather than I should be left to sin against Him, or betray my dear brethren who have been true to me and to God the Eternal Father."[7]
The Kimball data is absent from Smith’s analysis, but one wonders if it would have helped. To accept it would require a modification of the thesis that polygamy was driven by lust and a violation of barriers, and that Joseph knew it.
Critical sources |
|
Did Brigham Young boast about his ability to get more wives even though he was married to 50-60 women?
The references do not support the claims
As is often the case, the references do not support the claims, and the worst possible interpretation is placed on what are likely innocent remarks, or remarks intended to teach a spiritual point.
The Tanners cite multiple sources for this claim. They are examined below.
Journal of Discousces 5:210
Brigham is here discussing Thomas B. Marsh's return to the Church, and it is inaccurate to describe him as "boasting."
In conversing with brother Marsh, I find that he is about the same Thomas that he always was—full of anecdotes and chit-chat. He could hardly converse for ten minutes without telling an anecdote. His voice and style of conversation are familiar to me.
He has told you that he is an old man. Do you think that I am an old man? I could prove to this congre[ga]tion that I am young; for I could find more girls who would choose me for a husband than can any of the young men.
Brother Thomas considers himself very aged and infirm, and you can see that he is, brethren and sisters. What is the cause of it? He left the Gospel of salvation. What do you think the difference is between his age and mine? One year and seven months to a day; and he is one year, seven months, and fourteen days older than brother Heber C. Kimball.
"Mormonism" keeps men and women young and handsome; and when they are full of the Spirit of God, there are none of them but what will have a glow upon their countenances; and that is what makes you and me young; for the Spirit of God is with us and within us.
When brother Thomas thought of returning to the Church, the plurality of wives troubled him a good deal. Look at him. Do you think it need to? I do not; for I doubt whether he could get one wife. Why it should have troubled an infirm old man like him is not for me to say. He read brother Orson Pratt's work upon that subject, and discovered that the doctrine was beautiful, consistent, and exalting, and that the kingdom could not be perfect without it. Neither can it be perfect without a great many things that the people do not yet understand, though they will come in the own due time of the Lord.
See Quote mining—Journal of Discourses 5:210 to see how this quote was mined.
Journal of Discourses 8:178
Brother Cannon remarked that people wondered how many wives and children I had. He may inform them that I shall have wives and children by the million, and glory, and riches, and power, and dominion, and kingdom after kingdom, and ..
See Quote mining—Journal of Discourses 8:178 to see how this quote was mined.
Critical sources |
|
Why did Brigham Young say that women "have no right to meddle in the affairs of the Kingdom of God"?
Brigham's intent has been distorted
Brigham Young said women "have no right to meddle in the affairs of the Kingdom of God". This is used to portray Brigham as authoritarian and sexist. However, Brigham's intent has been distorted, and those who cite this have used presentism to bias the reader against him.
Sally Denton uses this quote, and uses D. Michael Quinn, as her source. Unfortunately, Denton omits the context which Quinn's volume provides:
- [women] have no right to meddle in the affairs of the Kingdom of God[—]outside the pale of this they have a right to meddle because many of them are more sagacious & shrewd & more competent [than men] to attend to things of financial affairs. they never can hold the keys of the Priesthood apart from their husbands. [8]
Brigham then continued, "When I want Sisters or the Wives of the members of the church to get up Relief Society I will summon them to my aid but until that time let them stay at home & if you see females huddling together veto the concern." [9]
Brigham's statement about "meddling," then, in no way reflects on women's competence or skills—he insists that many know better than men. Brigham's point is that women have no right to priesthood government. This statement was probably precipitated by Emma Smith's use of her role as head of the Relief Society to resist Joseph's teachings, especially plural marriage. [10] Brigham is signaling that those without priesthood power may not dictate to ordained priesthood leaders about priesthood matters.
The author relies on presentism, since Brigham and virtually all of his contemporaries (men and women) likely had attitudes about women's roles which would strike us as "sexist"
Though the quote seems offensive and exclusionary, we need to remember the context of the time. Attitudes toward women during that time, and even 100 years later, were far from our current attitudes. It is unreasonable to expect people living in a different time to fit 21st century perspectives. Brigham was, however, quite liberal for his day—he encouraged women to get an education: for example, he even assigned several to travel to the eastern United States to get training as physicians.
Critical sources |
|
Brigham Young 8 October 1861 discourse on plural marriage
Summary: Notes on BRIGHAM YOUNG's Unpublished Sermon of 8 October 1861.Why did Emma Smith and Brigham Young dislike one another?
Summary: After Joseph Smith's death, Brigham Young and Joseph's widow Emma came into conflict for a number of reasons.Has the Church tried to hide Brigham Young's polygamy?
Summary: Some critics have claimed that the Church has tried to hide Brigham Young's polygamy in a modern lesson manual—despite polygamy being the one thing for which Brigham is certainly known, in and out of the Church.Joseph Smith's Polygamy: "Brigham Young Seeks a Plural Wife", by Brian C. Hales
Notes
- ↑ George D. Smith, Nauvoo Polygamy: "...but we called it celestial marriage" (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2008), 364–365. ( Index of claims , (Detailed book review))
- ↑ Citing Brigham Young Manuscript History, 16 February 1849, Church Archives. The quoted material is on pp. 19–20.
- ↑ Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language (New York: S. Converse, 1828), s.v. "bound."
- ↑ Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language (New York: S. Converse, 1828), s.v. "bound." (Compare article for "boundary.")
- ↑ Church Historian’s Office, History of the Church, 1839–circa 1882, DVD 2, call number CR 100 102, vol. 19 (19 February 1849), 19.
- ↑ Whitney, Life of Heber C. Kimball, 325-326.
- ↑ Heber C. Kimball to Vilate Kimball, "My Dear Vilate" (23 October 1842), cited in Augusta Joyce Crocheron (author and complier), Representative Women of Deseret, a book of biographical sketches to accompany the picture bearing the same title (Salt Lake City: J. C. Graham & Co., 1884). (accessed 2 December 2008).
- ↑ D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power (Signature Books, 1994), 650.
- ↑ Seventies Record, 9 March 1845, holograph, Church Archives (cited in Beecher, see below).
- ↑ Maureen Ursenbach Beecher, "Women in Winter Quarters," Sunstone no. (Issue #8:4/15) (July 1983), note 37. off-site
"The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy"
Church Finances
Detailed response to CES Letter, Other
Why did the Church get involved in a shopping center?
In early 2003, the Church announced it was purchasing a shopping mall directly south of Temple Square. Because the Church already owned a majority of the land on which the mall was built, this purchase brought the remainder under the Church’s control.[1] The Church did so with the purpose of revitalizing the are directly south of Temple Square because the Church had a “compelling responsibility to protect the environment of the Salt Lake Temple.”[2]
After three years of planning, the Church announced a 20-acre development project called City Creek Center to replace the old shopping mall and several other buildings directly south of Temple Square. The project would be a mixed-use development, which included retail, office, and residential space.[3] Mixed-use developments had become prominent in real estate development because this type of development “ensures vitality through activity and diversity. It makes areas safer. It also reduces the need to travel, making people less reliant on cars, bringing welcome environmental benefits.”[4] All of these objectives are interests of the Church, especially in the environment around the Salt Lake Temple.
Did the Church use tithing funds to finance the purchases and buildings?
In the April 2003 general conference, President Gordon B. Hinckley explained “tithing funds have not and will not be used to acquire this property. Nor will they be used in developing it for commercial purposes.” Instead, “funds for this have come and will come from those commercial entities owned by the Church. These resources, together with the earnings of invested reserve funds, will accommodate this program.”[5] Multiple statements were subsequently made reinforcing the fact that tithing funds would not and were not used for the development project.[6]
Some claims are made that tithing really was used because some of the money came from earnings on invested reserve funds, which funds were set up using tithing donations. However, financial documents have shown that only earnings on invested funds, not the original funds themselves, were used to finance the development project.[7]
Why would the Church put tithing into investment portfolios?
Some individuals wonder why the Church puts tithing into investments instead of donating to the poor.
President Gordon B. Hinckley explained that saving some tithing funds is a fundamental principle of Church finances:
In the financial operations of the Church, we have observed two basic and fixed principles: One, the Church will live within its means. It will not spend more than it receives. Two, a fixed percentage of the income will be set aside to build reserves against what might be called a possible “rainy day.”
For years, the Church has taught its membership the principle of setting aside a reserve of food, as well as money, to take care of emergency needs that might arise. We are only trying to follow the same principle for the Church as a whole.[8]
The tithing set aside as a reserve is added to the Church’s investment funds. Bishop Gerald Causse explained the reason for putting saved tithing funds into investments instead of simply holding the tithing in cash or cash equivalents:
In the parable of the talents, the lord who asked for an accounting from his servants chastised the one who had not invested the money entrusted to him but instead had hid that money in the earth. He characterized the servant as “wicked and slothful” for not investing that money for a reasonable financial return. Consistent with this spiritual principle, the Church’s financial reserves are not left idle in nonproductive bank accounts but are instead employed where they can produce a return.[9]
Did the Church achieve its objectives with the City Creek Center project?
Most analysts agree that the City Creek project was successful in revitalizing downtown Salt Lake City:
New York Times[10]Salt Lake Tribune[11]“The center has added 2,000 jobs and brought more than 16 million visitors into downtown,” according to the Economic Benchmark Report of 2013, paid for by the real estate firm CBRE. Taking into account the improving economy, the report credits the mall, at 50 South Main Street, with helping downtown retail sales increase by 36 percent, or $209 million, in 2012. The “mall is the single most important thing to happen to Salt Lake City in 50 years, maybe more,” said Bruce Bingham, a partner with Hamilton Partners, a Chicago-based real estate developer. “It revitalized downtown.”
The International Council of Shopping Centers “selected City Creek Center — winner of a number of other awards since its 2012 debut — and the site's co-designer and operator Taubman Centers for its top accolade as "the most outstanding example of shopping center design and development for 2014-2015
BuildingSaltLake.com[12]"Main Street is thriving and it would not be if City Creek Center had not been built," said Jason Mathis, executive director of the Downtown Alliance, representing downtown merchants. "I attribute a lot of downtown's success to City Creek Center's development and the design."
“According to data from the Downtown Alliance, since City Creek opened, downtown retail sales have increased 46 percent, retail employment increased 83 percent and downtown hotel room bookings grew by 62 percent. The retail center’s presence also contributed to an 119.7 percent rise in retail wages, 26.9 in food service wages and 74.1 percent in hotel wages.”
While there are multiple factors that have led to the current boom downtown, based on the numbers City Creek has played an important role in bringing more development downtown. “This is our best example of a TOD (transportation oriented development),” said Reid Ewing, professor of City and Metropolitan Planning at the University of Utah. Ewing led a study looking at foot traffic downtown after City Creek opened and found that the block of Main Street between South Temple and 100 South had the highest pedestrian activity than any other block downtown. Ewing cited his vibrancy scale that measures vibrancy based on imageability, enclosure, human scale, transparency and complexity as an indicator of the health of downtown, especially near City Creek. “This (City Creek Center) has it all in terms of vibrancy,” said Ewing.
Further reading
City Creek Project
- The most comprehensive review of the finances involved in the City Creek Center project is available in “Order Granting Motion for Summary Judgment,” James Huntsman v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 10 September 2021, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, case 2:21-cv-02504-SVW-SK.
- A history of the downtown situation in 2003 is available in "Church to buy Crossroads Plaza mall," Deseret News, 19 March 2003.
- The announcement and details of the redevelopment project is available in "Downtown rebound: LDS Church unveils plans for 20-acre development," Deseret News, 4 October 2006.
- A detailed review of the entire project is available in “Mormon leaders and Salt Lake City work together to transform land,” Deseret News, 7 March 2010.
- A philosophical consideration of whether the Church should invest in things like malls is available in Nathan Oman, "City Creek and the Choices of Thrift," TimesandSeasons.org, 2 April 2012.
Church Finances
- Gerald Causse, “The Spiritual Foundations of Church Financial Self-Reliance,” Ensign, July 2018.
- Church Newsroom, "Church Finances and a Growing Global Faith," Newsroom.ChurchofJesusChrist.org, 22 May 2018.
- Tad Walch, "Church finances: Presiding Bishopric offers unique look inside financial operations of growing faith," Deseret News, 14 Feb. 2020.
Notes
- ↑ "Church to buy Crossroads Plaza mall," Deseret News, 19 March 2003.
- ↑ Gordon B. Hinckley, “The Condition of the Church,” April 2003 general conference.
- ↑ "Downtown rebound: LDS Church unveils plans for 20-acre development," Deseret News, 4 October 2006.
- ↑ Department of the Environment, United Kingdom, 24 July 1995, as cited in A. Coupland, Reclaiming the City: Mixed Use Development (London, E & FN Spon, 1997).
- ↑ Gordon B. Hinckley, “The Condition of the Church,” April 2003 general conference.
- ↑ A compilation of statements is available on pages 2–3 in “Order Granting Motion for Summary Judgment,” James Huntsman v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 10 September 2021, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, case 2:21-cv-02504-SVW-SK.
- ↑ A financial analysis on these redacted documents is available on pages 7–8 in “Order Granting Motion for Summary Judgment.”
- ↑ Gordon B. Hinckley, “The State of the Church,” April 1991 general conference.
- ↑ Gerald Causse, “The Spiritual Foundations of Church Financial Self-Reliance,” Ensign, July 2018.
- ↑ Caitlin Kelly, "Mormon-Backed Mall Breathes Life into Salt Lake City," The New York Times, 9 July 2013.
- ↑ Tony Semerad, "City Creek Center: Boon for downtown or one of SLC's 'biggest mistakes'? Salt Lake Tribune, 11 May 2015.
- ↑ Isaac Riddle, "City Creek's impact on downtown growth by the numbers," BuildingSaltLake.com, 17 March 2017.
Tithing
Template:CESLetterItemShort Mormonism and church finances/Tithing/Paying tithing versus feeding your children or paying your rent
Names of the Church
The Church changed its name twice during its history
Jump to details:
- Question: How many times was the name of the Church changed through revelation?
- Question: What names did the Church go by prior to the revelation which established the correct one?
- Question: What is the history of name changes of the Church?
"Some things that are true are not very useful"
Boyd K. Packer's talk: "The Mantle is Far, Far Greater Than the Intellect"
Summary: Elder Packer gave an address to religious educators called "The Mantle is Far, Far Greater Than the Intellect." The following quote is a favorite of critics who wish to demonstrate that the Church wishes to suppress its history and independent thought: "There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful."
Jump to details:
"Criticizing leaders"
Elder Oaks on Church history
<onlyinclude>
Question: Did Elder Dallin H. Oaks say that it’s wrong to criticize leaders of the Church, even if the criticism is true?
Elder Oaks' comment is taken out of context: he is not saying that one should accept anything a Church leader says as true
Elder Dallin H. Oaks is claimed to have made the following comment at a Latter-day Saint Student Association fireside in the Salt Lake Tabernacle on 4 May 1986:
It’s wrong to criticize leaders of the Church, even if the criticism is true.
This quote is taken out of context by critics of the Church to imply that one should accept anything a Church leader says as true, even if it is not.
Elder Oaks responds to this claim directly in an interview with Helen Whitney for the PBS special "The Mormons"
Elder Oaks answers this claim himself in an interview with Helen Whitney for the PBS special "The Mormons." off-site In the following transcript, "HW" is "Helen Whitney" and "DHO" is "Dallin H. Oaks":
HW: You used an interesting phrase, “Not everything that’s true is useful.” Could you develop that as someone who’s a scholar and trying to encourage deep searching?
DHO: The talk where I gave that was a talk on “Reading Church History” — that was the title of the talk. And in the course of the talk I said many things about being skeptical in your reading and looking for bias and looking for context and a lot of things that were in that perspective. But I said two things in it and the newspapers and anybody who ever referred to the talk only referred to [those] two things: one is the one you cite, “Not everything that’s true is useful,” and that [meant] “was useful to say or to publish.” And you tell newspapers any time (media people) [that] they can’t publish something, they’ll strap on their armor and come out to slay you! [Laughs.]
I also said something else that has excited people: that it’s wrong to criticize leaders of the Church, even if the criticism is true, because it diminishes their effectiveness as a servant of the Lord. One can work to correct them by some other means, but don’t go about saying that they misbehaved when they were a youngster or whatever. Well, of course, that sounds like religious censorship also.
But not everything that’s true is useful. I am a lawyer, and I hear something from a client. It’s true, but I’ll be disciplined professionally if I share it because it’s part of the attorney-client privilege. There’s a husband-wife privilege, there’s a priest-penitent privilege, and so on. That’s an illustration of the fact that not everything that’s true is useful to be shared.
In relation to history, I was speaking in that talk for the benefit of those that write history. In the course of writing history, I said that people ought to be careful in what they publish because not everything that’s true is useful. See a person in context; don’t depreciate their effectiveness in one area because they have some misbehavior in another area — especially from their youth. I think that’s the spirit of that. I think I’m not talking necessarily just about writing Mormon history; I’m talking about George Washington or any other case. If he had an affair with a girl when he was a teenager, I don’t need to read that when I’m trying to read a biography of the Founding Father of our nation. (See "Elder Oaks Interview Transcript from PBS Documentary" on mormonnewsroom.org)
Oaks (1987): "it is wrong to make statements of fact out of an evil motive, even if the statements are true"
Dallin H. Oaks
This is an edited version of a talk delivered at a Latter-day Saint Student Association fireside in the Salt Lake Tabernacle on 4 May 1986.
.....
The critical consideration is how we use the truth. When he treated this same subject in his letter to the Romans, Paul said, “If thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy him not with thy meat, for whom Christ died.” (Rom. 14:15.) A Christian who has concern for others exercises care in how he uses the truth. Such care does not denigrate the truth; it ennobles it.
Truth surely exists as an absolute, but our use of truth should be disciplined by other values. For example, it is wrong to make statements of fact out of an evil motive, even if the statements are true. It is wrong to threaten to reveal embarrassing facts unless money is paid, even if the facts are true. We call that crime blackmail. Doctors, lawyers, and other professionals are forbidden to reveal facts they have received in confidence, even though those facts are true.
Just as the principle of justice must be constrained by the principle of mercy (see Alma 42), so must the use of truth be disciplined by the principle of love. As Paul instructed the Ephesians, we “grow up into” Christ by “speaking the truth in love.” (See Eph. 4:15.)[1]
"the scary internet"
Question: Do Latter-day Saint ("Mormon") leaders teach us to avoid the internet?
Critical hyperbole: the "scary internet"
One critic of the Church makes the following claim:
Elder Quentin L. Cook made the following comment in the October 2012 Conference: “Some have immersed themselves in internet materials that magnify, exaggerate, and in some cases invent shortcomings of early Church leaders. Then they draw incorrect conclusions that can affect testimony. Any who have made these choices can repent and be spiritually renewed.”
Elder Dieter Uchtdorf said the following in his CES talk “What is truth?”: “…Remember that in this age of information there are many who create doubt about anything and everything at any time and every place. You will find even those who still claim that they have evidence that the earth is flat. That the moon is a hologram. It looks like it a little bit. And that certain movie stars are really aliens from another planet. And it is always good to keep in mind just because something is printed on paper, appears on the internet, is frequently repeated or has a powerful group of followers doesn’t make it true.”
Who cares whether you received the information from a stranger, television, book, magazine, comic book, napkin, and even the scary internet? They’re all mediums or conduits of information. It’s the information itself, its accuracy, and its relevance that you need to focus on and be concerned with. With all this talk from General Authorities against the scary internet and daring to be balanced by looking at what both defenders and critics are saying about the Church, it is as if questioning and researching and doubting is now the new pornography. [2]
The same critic also claims that "Under [Elder Quentin] Cook’s counsel, FAIR and unofficial LDS apologetic websites are anti-Mormon sources that should be avoided. Not only do they introduce to Mormons “internet materials that magnify, exaggerate, and in some cases invent shortcoming of early Church leaders” but they provide many ridiculous answers with logical fallacies and omissions while leaving members confused and hanging with a bizarre version of Mormonism."
Church leaders encourage us to use the internet to spread the Gospel
The author employs hyperbole (the "scary internet") to make it seem as if Elder's Cook and Uchtdorf are telling Church members to avoid using the internet. He has missed the point of their comments entirely.
According to the portion of the quote by Elder Uchtdorf that appears just prior to the portion quoted by the author, it doesn't matter by what medium you receive information:
it is always good to keep in mind just because something is printed on paper, appears on the internet, is frequently repeated or has a powerful group of followers doesn’t make it true.
Elder Uchtdorf is not telling members to avoid things that "appear on the internet" any more than he is telling them to avoid "printed paper." He has, in fact, precisely answered the question that the author asked after the author presented Elder Uchtdorf's quote.
Elder Cook is talking about the type of internet materials one looks at:
Some have immersed themselves in internet materials that magnify, exaggerate, and in some cases invent shortcomings of early Church leaders.
Once again, this is not an admonition by Elder Cook to avoid the "scary internet."
Who are the "September Six"?
The "September Six" were six individuals who were disciplined by the Church in September 1993
Six individuals were disciplined by the Church in September 1993. Supporters of those disciplined and critics of the Church have dubbed them "the September Six." The six individuals were:
- Lavina Fielding Anderson (excommunicated)
- Avraham Gileadi (excommunicated—now back in full fellowship)
- Maxine Hanks (excommunicated—now back in full fellowship as of 2012)
- D. Michael Quinn (excommunicated)
- Paul Toscano (excommunicated)
- Lynne Kanavel Whitesides (disfellowshipped)
Avraham Gileadi has never spoken publicly about the reasons for his excommunication, was never asked to retract any publications or statements, and has returned to full fellowship. Maxine Hanks returned to the Church as of 2012.
- It is sometimes claimed that the Church excommunicates or disfellowships scholars who publish historical information that is embarrassing to Church leaders.
- It is often claimed, despite the fact that these disciplinary actions are carried out by local leaders, that they are in reality instigated by general authorities.
- Some claim that the Church is silencing honest people for telling the truth.
- The Church is claimed to take a "dim view" of intellectuals.
- It is claimed that the LDS Church penalizes members for "merely criticizing officialdom or for publishing truthful—if uncomfortable—information," and "shroud their procedures with secrecy."
- The LDS Church prosecutes "many more of its members" than other religious groups.
Are the reasons for discipline ever made public?
Church leaders and officials rarely make the reasons or evidences presented at disciplinary councils public
Church leaders and officials rarely make the reasons or evidences presented at disciplinary councils public. Thus, former members are able to claim whatever they like about excommunication without contradiction from the Church.
D. Michael Quinn claims that his excommunication was the direct result of his historical research on the origins of Mormonism. He refused to attend his own disciplinary council, telling his stake president that it was "a process which was designed to punish me for being the messenger of unwanted historical evidence and to intimidate me from further work in Mormon history." [3]
Despite Quinn's belief that his Church discipline was all about his history, his stake president wrote back on 11 May 1993, saying "There are other matters that I need to talk with you about that are not related to your historical writings. These are very sensitive and highly confidential and this is why I have not mentioned them before in writing." [4]
<onlyinclude>
Statement by The Council of the First Presidency and The Quorum of the Twelve on Church Discipline
January 1994:
Statement by The Council of the First Presidency and The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:
In light of extensive publicity given to six recent Church disciplinary councils in Utah, we believe it helpful to reaffirm the position of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. We deeply regret the loss of Church membership on the part of anyone. The attendant consequences felt over time by the individuals and their families are very real.
In their leadership responsibilities, local Church officers may seek clarification and other guidance from General Authorities of the Church. General Authorities have an obligation to teach principles and policies and to provide information that may be helpful in counseling members for whom local leaders are responsible. In matters of Church discipline, the General Authorities do not direct the decisions of local disciplinary councils. Furthermore, the right of appeal is open to anyone who feels he or she has been unfairly treated by a disciplinary council.
It is difficult to explain Church disciplinary action to representatives of the media. Considerations of confidentiality restrain public comment by Church leaders in such private matters. We have the responsibility to preserve the doctrinal purity of the Church. We are united in this objective. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught an eternal principle when he explained: "That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy."[5]:156 Citations in this letter were within the text; FairMormon has moved them to endnotes to improve readability.</ref> In instructing His Twelve Disciples in the new world about those who would not repent, the Savior said, "But if he repent not he shall not be numbered among my people, that he may not destroy my people. . . ." (3 Nephi 18꞉31, see also Mosiah 26꞉36, and Alma 5꞉59.) The Prophet also remarked that "from apostates the faithful have received the severest persecutions."[5]:67 This continues to be the case today.
The long standing policy of Church discipline is outlined in the Doctrine and Covenants: "We believe that all religious societies have a right to deal with their members . . . according to the rules and regulations of such societies; provided that such dealings be for fellowship and good standing; . . . They can only excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw from them their fellowship." (D&C 134꞉10.)
Faithful members of the Church can distinguish between mere differences of opinion and those activities formally defined as apostasy. Apostasy refers to Church members who " repeatedly act in clear, open and deliberate public opposition to the Church or its leaders; or persist in teaching as Church doctrine information that is not Church doctrine after being corrected by their bishops or higher authority; or continue to follow the teachings of apostate cults (such as those that advocate plural marriage) after being corrected by their bishops or higher authority."[6]
The general and local officers of the Church will continue to do their duty, and faithful Church members will understand.
As leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we reach out in love to all and constantly pray that the Lord, whose Church this is, will bless those who love and seek divine truth.
Signed:
The Council of the First Presidency and
The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles [7]
Key sources |
|
Wiki links |
|
Online |
|
Navigators |
Notes
- ↑ Dallin H. Oaks, “Criticism,” Ensign 17 (February 1987).
- ↑ Jeremy Runnells, "Letter to a CES Director" (2013)
- ↑ D. Michael Quinn, Letter to Paul A. Hanks, 7 February 1993; cited in Lavina Fielding Anderson, "DNA Mormon: D. Michael Quinn," in Mormon Mavericks: Essays on Dissenters, edited by John Sillito and Susan Staker (Salt Lake City, Signature Books, 2002), 329-364.
- ↑ Paul A. Hanks to D. Michael Quinn, 11 May 1993; cited in Anderson, "DNA Mormon."
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Joseph Smith, Jr., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected by Joseph Fielding Smith, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1976). off-site
- ↑ General Handbook of Instructions, 10-3.
- ↑ "News of the Church," Ensign (January 1994) 75.
Strengthening the Church Members Committee
"When the prophet speaks the debate is over"
Notes
- [note] Samuel Katich, "A Tale of Two Marriage Systems: Perspectives on Polyandry and Joseph Smith," Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, 2003.