HiJolly

I do think it is clear that there were reasonably smart bi-pedal hominids running around, making pottery, tools, and burying their dead, for many tens of thousands of years before the birth of Christ. It seems that according to the Church, we should not term these as 'men', or, we should utterly reject Bishop Usher's chronology. Good thing Man, His Origin and Destiny isn't doctrine... Either way, I think it's a bad idea to reject the evidence coming forth from the earth. I think instead we should integrate it into our paradigm of reality. To do that, I had to learn about it and study it for many years. Now I feel pretty good about it all, but along the way I certainly had to adjust my views. A few times. HiJolly

I used to struggle with worthiness issues, too. I hated not feeling worthy to give blessings, but certainly didn't want to stop my wife/kids from receiving them. So I didn't mind going to the HT or good friends for a blessing. Sometimes awkward questions were asked, but I didn't give any reason as to why I wouldn't do it myself. I know some men would rather damn themselves than do that, but at least I didn't have that problem. Then I started thinking about certain priests in the ward who blessed the sacrament unworthily. I don't think that their unworthiness kept the sacrament from blessing the lives of the members. It may have condemned the priests, but not the members. So, too, I think that a blessing from an unworthy father is not good for the father, but can still heal or bless the recipient. So... HiJolly

My view is that agency and oppostition go hand in hand, you can't have one without the other, or there would be no point. All through life we have things in opposition, even if they are complementary. For example, flesh and spirit, reason and emotion, justice and mercy, understanding and wisdom, earth and heaven. What's REALLY cool to me is that the one thing that brings all of these together in harmony, is Jesus Christ, the Mediator of all things. I think Heavenly Father set it all up, and he HAD to set it up that way, or the objective couldn't be met. That is, that we could learn and develop to have the same level of self limitation and goodness that He has. As it is said, we are free to choose our actions, but not so free that we can also choose our consequences. Those consequences are set out by law and are exactly what we need, to further our development. Of course, that opinon requires a great deal of faith and trust in our Heavely Father. Proverbs 3:5-6. Yes, me too. I've been here in Utah now for almost 15 years, and I have found that most members are afraid of learning too much. I lost that fear when Heavenly Father taught me that if I am keeping my covenants and keeping my heart close to Him, I need not fear, for He will lead me aright. Thanks for posting this thread. HiJolly

Yes, in my opinion, His law is for Him fullfilled, and it is to "be". And since he loves, He allows us to "be" as He is, if we will. And so, the Creation, the Plan of Salvation, prophets, commandments, the atonement, the Holy Ghost and all the rest. HiJolly

Well, that's a deep subject. <pun intended - sorry) Anything touching on eternity is not well understood on Earth. That doesn't mean, though, that God doesn't sometimes reveal things that concern the eternities; but it does mean that when He does do so, the recipient can have a very difficult time sharing it with other people. Or even understanding it, themselves. Joseph spoke about things of this nature only a few times (maybe even only once or twice). The major case in point is his King Follett sermon. Here's part of the sermon. Here's the basic premise: intelligence (co-eternal w/ God) >> spirit creation into spirit body >> physical creation into mortal body >> resurrection into immortal body . So we start as immortal, and end as immortal, and in between we are still immortal inside; we are progressing from one into the next, following a Godly plan we call the Plan of Salvation. HiJolly

That much I agree with. Not that it will neccessarily be that way, but it sure happens a lot. Pure hogwash. The gnostics believe the physical world, physical body, etc. is evil. Not the Mormon Church. BIG difference. There are many, many more differences also - the gnostics believe that the creator of the Earth is evil. Not the Mormons. I couldn't possibly list all the facts to disprove DS's opinion on this -- there are just too many! As to Masonry's men-only teachings, Joseph clearly refuted that view by including the Sisters in the temple ordinances, even to their being involved in the administration thereof. Mason's don't allow women to worship in their lodges (temples), but Mormons not only do, but add that the man CANNOT be exalted in Celestial glory without the woman. That's two points made, two points WRONG for Deer Slayer. Not a good start. Not true, except as it applies to Church administration, and even then, the word 'subservient' is ridiculous. And there is far, far more to this life and the NEXT life, than Church administration. Such a narrow view is, again, ridiculous. DS may be alluding to wording in the temple ceremony for some of his/her opinion, but we're not allowed to go into specifics of that here, or I would. You can see, though, from DS's track record, there is reason to doubt DS's accuracy of opinion. <sigh> I'm getting tired of responding already. Sorry. Here's something to keep in mind, regarding odd quotes from various people in the Church: Approaching Mormon Doctrine Reading the entire thing is something every church member ought to do, in my opinion. HiJolly

I hope you have a wonderful baptism. I'll be baptizing my youngest child tomorrow, too. I keep thinking of what a blessing it has been in my life, and even though I was only 8, it has given me much good all my life. I don't think I said that well, but, whatever. Have a great day tomorrow! HiJolly

I have also heard that one could not be a Rabbi without being married. I also heard that the Jewish mystics couldn't study the mysteries unless they were over the age of 40 and married. HiJolly

It hadn't been policy before then, and I think Elder McConkie was so sure of himself, he didn't feel the need. I would say that was a significant error in judgement, but it's all hindsight and so rather unfair to him. bottom line: we all mess up. Trust in God, not in man. HiJolly

Dang. The fact is I don't know for sure, but I do have an opinion. Joseph Smith Jr. was a wonderful man. He had many strengths, including a genuine willingness to allow other people to believe whatever they wanted, regardless of how heretical it was. He also supported the idea that no one should be excommunicated for 'apostate' beliefs, though he drew the line when people took action to hurt the Church or the Saints. He once said (paraphrase) "No man was ever damned for believing too much." But he also had weaknesses, born of the difficult life all people experienced back then. One of these was an intense and profound loyalty to his friends. Weakness? Loyalty was actually required to survive all the oppression, mob actions, etc. But Joseph took it to a fault, and was absolutely devastated when his loyalty to a friend was betrayed. cf. John C. Bennett. This mini-lecture actually does have a point... David O. McKay had this same 'weakness' of intense and profound loyalty to his friends. He would NEVER, EVER discipline one in whom he had placed his trust. One in whom the trust of the Church was invested. For more of an understanding, read the wonderful book David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism. Also, to understand Joseph's sense of loyalty, read Joseph Smith, Rough Stone Rolling. Hope that helps. Feel free to ask, I just love to pontificate HiJolly

I hope you're reporting them when you see them, Ztodd. HiJolly

I don't know, I don't know (I'd be surprized), and yes, it seems to make their work a bit easier HiJolly

I'm not neutral. I vote. I've read and studied the constitution. I learn about the candidates. I even support people that end up only getting .1% of the vote, sometimes. Is that helping? I doubt it. So, I need more ideas of what to do. Please don't ask me to join the JBS. I investigated that group back in the 70's, and it's filled with lies, distortions, name-calling, and hatred. I'll have nothing to do with it. HiJolly

Jesus taught us to love our enemies. To pray for those who despitefully use us. Let's say we have a group of people who have been decieved and are thinking they follow Jesus, when in reality they follow Satan. Let's assume we know who these people are. Now ---- what do we do about it? Do we call the FBI? Make placards and picket their offices/homes/businesses? I don't think so. The Gospel, it seems to me, is a practical way of living, loving, and lifting ourselves and our neighbors. We believe in Christ, and we serve our fellow man. We succor those in need, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, support the weak. In doing so, we serve Christ. If we are busily engaged in doing good, then that is right. I still need to know how knowing about any conspiracy theory, even if it's 100% proven and true, can lead us to do good. Specifically, what are the 'good' actions we must take, to fight the secret combinations? We see what happened in the Book of Mormon. Seems to me, that until our 'secret' foes come out in public, as shown in the Book of Mormon, we have to focus on our own behaviors and our own sins, and pray and have faith that God will preserve us. From what I read in the scriptures, only AFTER a 'secret' combination exposes itself, can we do battle. I'm not trying to argue. I'm trying to see if there is something I'm missing. Comments? HiJolly

Do you understand God's compassion, when he commanded the armies of Israel to kill all men, women, children and animals in the newly promised land? If you don't , then you'd better review your belief in the Bible. If you do, then I don't understand why the deaths of a couple of innocent children would bother you. You ignored my previous response to your question, which I admit you may have forgotten. Please address my response (above in this thread). I'm asking for clarification of your original question. HiJolly

I know many very nice, spiritual Christian evangelicals. To link government, secret combinations, and evangelicals with such an apparent broad brush is not a good idea, IMO. Is there something more specific you had in mind? In general, I detest these kinds of topics because there is nothing uplifting or helpful in them. I mean, we can look over our shoulders more often, but what else? Practically speaking, I mean. I'd like to know if I'm mistaken here. If I *knew* that someone (say, Mitt Romney) was involved in a secret combination, then I'd vote for someone else - no direct action would be taken by *me* AGAINST him. Does anyone see it any differently? Seems to me we just need to repent of our own sins, and try to judge righteously so we don't get sucked into doing bad things ourselves. HiJolly

It's a very good thing to repent. HiJolly

More loving of whom? Seriously. HiJolly

No, unfortunately... When I read David O. McKay and the rise of Modern Mormonism earlier this year, I found that it has quite a bit to say about the whole situation. I seem to recall in that book that by the late 60's President McKay was in such poor health that he was easy to get around - this is why his councelors were running most of the operations of the Church. Also, Elder McConkie's father-in-law, Joseph Fielding Smith, was the next prophet of the Church, and during most of the 50's and all of the 60's was the President of the Quorum of the 12. HiJolly

I don't know - My mom has a first edition, I've already asked her to leave it to me in her will. I know, that's bad, but... I did it anyway... And I hope all LDS know that the Church's current position (no pun intended) is that sex is both for procreation and to improve marital relations. HiJolly

Sounds biblical to me. :) That works! HiJolly

I don't mind, especially now cobra's banned. I just wanted to see cobra back up his/her statement. I agree with both of you on this point. HiJolly

I posted this on another thread, and MorningStar (blame it on her) thought it should be its own topic. So.... The attached items are entries from Pres. David O. McKay's office journal on the subject of Bruce R. McConkie's book "Mormon Doctrine", during the period following its original publication. - -------------------- March 5, 1959: Elder Mark E. Petersen and Elder Marion G. Romney called at my request. I asked them if they would together go over Elder Bruce R. McConkie's book, "Mormon Doctrine" and make a list of the corrections that should be made preparatory to his sending out an addendum to all members of the Church who have purchased his book. - -------------------- Jan. 7, 1960: 10:15 to 12:45 p.m. RE: The Book--"Mormon Doctrine". The First Presidency met with Elders Mark E. Petersen and Marion G. Romney. They submitted their report upon their examination of the book "Mormon Doctrine" by Elder Bruce McConkie. These brethren reported that the manuscript of the book "Mormon Doctrine" had not been read by the reading committee, that President Joseph Fielding Smith did not know anything about it until it was published. Elder Petersen states that the extent of the corrections which he had marked in his copy of the book (1067) affected most of the 776 pages of the book. He also said that he thought the brethren should be under the rule that no book should be published without a specific approval of the First Presidency. I stated that the decision of the First Presidency and the Committee should be announced to the Twelve. It was agreed that the necessary corrections are so numerous that to republish a corrected edition of the book would be such an extensive repudiation of the original as to destroy the credit of the author; that the republication of the book should be forbidden and that the book should be repudiated in such a way as to save the career of the author as one of the General Authorities of the Church. It was also agreed that this decision should be announced to the Council of the Twelve before I talk to the author. Elder Petersen will prepare an editorial for publication in the Improvement Era, stating the principle of approval of books on Church doctrine. A rough draft will be submitted to us for approval. - -------------------- Jan. 7, 1960 [part of a letter addressed to David O. McKay from Marion G. Romney, dated January 28, 1959]. The author is an able and thorough student of the gospel. In many respects he has produced a remarkable book. Properly used, it quickly introduces the student to the authorities on most any gospel subject. As to the book itself, notwithstanding its many commendable and valuable features and the author's assumption of "sole and full responsibility" for it, its nature and scope and the authoritative tone of the style in which it is written pose the question as to the propriety of the author's attempting such a project without assignment and supervision from him whose right and responsibility it is to speak for the Church on "Mormon Doctrine." Had the work been authoritatively supervised, some of the following matters might have been omitted and the treatment of others modified. A. References to churches and other groups who do not accept "Mormon Doctrine." 1. Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, who sometimes refer to themselves as "Josephites." (Exhibit II-1, pages 50, 141, 362) 2. "Christian Churches" generally. (Exhibit II-2, pages 139, 455) 3. "Catholic Church." (Exhibit II-3, pages 13, 66, 129, 130, 216, 241, 242, 314-315, 342, 346, 350, 422, 499, 511, 697) 4. Communists and Catholics. (Exhibit II-4, pages 26-7, 131) 5. Evolution and Evolutionists (Exhibit II-5, pages 37, 77, 136, 180, 228, 238, 659) B. Declaration as to "Mormon Doctrine" on controversial issues. 1. "Pre-Adamites." (Exhibit III-1, pages 17, 262) 2. Status of Animals and Plants in the Garden of Eden. (Exhibit III-2, pages 36, 234-35) 3. Meaning of the various accounts of Creation. (Exhibit III-3, pages 157-8, 167-8) 4. Dispensation of Abraham. (Exhibit III-4, page 203) 5. Moses as a translated being. (Exhibit III-5, pages 206, 445, 466, 727-8) 6. Origin of Individuality. (Exhibit III-6, page 404) 7. Defiling the priesthood. (Exhibit III-7, page 437) 8. Manner in which Jesus was Begotten. (Exhibit III-8, page 494) 9. Written sermons. (Exhibit III-9, pages 634-5, 716) 10. Resurrection of stillborn children. (Exhibit III-10, page 694) C. Miscellaneous Interpretations. (Exhibit IV) Frequency of Administrations, page 22 Baptism in the "molten sea," page 98 II Peter 1;19, page 102 Paul married, page 112 Status of those "with Christ in His Resurrection," page 128 Consecration of oil, page 147 Councils and schools among the Gods, page 151 Limitations on Deity, page 154 Sunday not a proper day for family reunions, page 254 Geological changes at the time of the deluge, page 268 The Holy Ghost a spirit man, page 329 Facing east in temples when giving the Hosanna Shout, page 337 Details on family prayer and asking the blessing on food, page 526 Women to be gods, page 551 Interpretation of Doctrine and Covenants 93:1, page 581 Interpretation of "Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning," page 606 Status of little children in the celestial kingdom, page 607 Resumption of schools of the prophets, page 613 Time of beginning of seasons, page 616 Interpretation of III Nephi 21:20, page 618 D. Repeated use of the word "apostate" and related terms in a way which to many seems discourteous and to others gives offense. (Exhibit V, pages 123, 125, 160, 169, 212, 223, 383, 528, 538, 548, 596) - -------------------- Jan 8, 1960. The First Presidency held a meeting. We decided that Bruce R. McConkie's book, "Mormon Doctrine" recently published by Bookcraft Company must not be re-published, as it is full of errors and misstatements, and it is most unfortunate that it has received such wide circulation. It is reported to us that Brother McConkie has made corrections in his book, and is now preparing another edition. We decided this morning that we do not want him to publish another edition. We decided, also, to have no more books published by General Authorities without their first having the consent of the First Presidency. - -------------------- Jan. 14, 1960: Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency. Among matters discussed at this meeting were the following: Elder Mark E. Petersen's proposed editorial on books by General Authorities. A draft of a proposed editorial for the Improvement Era, prepared by Elder Mark E. Petersen, on the subject of selecting good books, and upon the approval of the publication of books by the First Presidency, was read. After consideration it was decided that the general statement, without the reference to "Mormon Doctrine" and "Ancient America and the Book of Mormon," which should be handled separately, would be a suitable editorial on the subject of selecting good books. Further action on the matter of publishing a statement relating to the approval of books by the First Presidency was deferred awaiting consideration of the subject by me with President Joseph Fielding Smith. - -------------------- Jan. 27, 1960: Conference with Pres. Joseph Fielding Smith re: Bruce R. McConkie's book, "Mormon Doctrine." At the request of the First Presidency, I called President Joseph Fielding Smith, and told him that we are a unit in disapproving of Brother Bruce R. McConkie's book, "Mormon Doctrine," as an authoritative exposition of the principles of the gospel. I then said, "Now, Brother Smith, he is a General Authority, and we do not want to give him a public rebuke that would be embarrassing to him and lessen his influence with the members of the Church, so we shall speak to the Twelve at our meetingt in the Temple tomorrow, and tell them that Brother McConkie's book is not approved as an authoritative book, and that it should not be republished, even if the errors (some 1,067 of them) are corrected." Brother Smith agreed with this suggestion to report to the Twelve, and said, "That is the best thing to do." I then said that Brother McConkie is advocating by letter some of the principles as printed in his book in answer to letters he receives. Brother Smith said, "I will speak to him about that." I then mentioned that he is also speaking on these subjects, and Brother Smith said, "I will speak to him about that also." I also said that the First Presidency had decided that General Authorities of the Church should not publish books without submitting them to some member of the General Authorities, and President Smith agreed to this as being wise. - -------------------- Jan. 28, 1960: 8:30 to 9 a.m. Bruce R. McConkie's book. Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency. I reported to my counselors that I had talked with President Joseph Fielding Smith about the decision that the book "Mormon Doctrine" should not be republished and about handling the matter to avoid undermining Elder McConkie's influence. President Smith agreed that the book should not be republished, and said that he would talk with Brother McConkie. It was decided that the First Presidency should inform Brother McConkie before he learns of our decision from some other source, so Brother McConkie was asked to come into our meeting this morning. When he arrived I informed him of the desire of the First Presidency with reference to his book not being republished, to which he agreed. The recommendation was also made that he answer inquiries on the subject with care. Brother McConkie said, "I am amenable to whatever you Brethren want. I will do exactly what you want. I will be as discreet and as wise as I can." In answering letters he said that he would express no views contrary to views which the First Presidency has expressed. He said that he would conform in every respect. 10 a.m. to 2:45 p.m. Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve in the Salt Lake Temple. At Council meeting I reported to the Brethren our decision regarding Elder Bruce R. McConkie's book "Mormon Doctrine," stating that it had caused considerable comment throughout the Church, and that it has been a source of concern to the Brethren ever since it was published. I said that this book had not been presented to anyone for consideration or approval until after its publication. I further said that the First Presidency have given it very careful consideration, as undoubtedly have some of the Brethren of the Twelve also, and that the First Presidency now recommend that the book not be republished; that it be not republished even in corrected form, even though Brother McConkie mentions in the book that he takes all responsibility for it; and that it be not recognized as an authoritative book. I said further that the question has arisen as to whether a public correction should be made and an addendum given emphasizing the parts which are unwisely presented or misquoted or incorrect; but it is felt that that would not be wise because Brother McConkie is one of the General Authorities, and it might lessen his influence. The First Presicdency recommend that the situation be left as it is, and whenever a question about it arises, we can answer that it is unauthoritative, that it was issued by Brother McConkie on his own responsibility, and he must answer for it. McConkie on his own responsibility, and he must answer for it. I reported that the First Presidency had talked with Brother McConkie this morning, and he said he will do whatever the Brethren want him to do. He will not attempt to republish the book, nor to say anything by letter, and if he answers letters or inquiries that he will answer them in accordance with the suggestions made by the Brethren, and not advocate those things concerning which question has been raised as contained in the book. The Brethren unanimously approved of this. I then said that the First Presidency further recommend that when any member of the General Authorities desires to write a book, that the Brethren of the Twelve or the First Presidency be consulted regarding it. While the author need not get the approval of these Brethren, they should know before it is published that a member of the General Authorities wants to publish a book. I said it may seem all right for the writer of the book to say, "_I_ _only_ am responsible for it," but I said "you cannot separate your position from your individuality, and we should like the authors to present their books to the Twelve or a Committee appointed." I asked the Brethren of the Twelve to convey this information to the other General Authorities. On motion this became the consensus of the Council.

Ah, my bad. Yes, Elder McConkie and the other General Authorities have the right to declare doctrine. I should have said, as Honos did, he cannot "create" doctrine. Thanks, H. HiJolly

The attached items are entries from Pres. David O. McKay's office journal onthe subject of Bruce R. McConkie's book "Mormon Doctrine", during the period following its original publication. - -------------------- March 5, 1959: Elder Mark E. Petersen and Elder Marion G. Romney called at my request. I asked them if they would together go over Elder Bruce R. McConkie's book, "Mormon Doctrine" and make a list of the corrections that should be made preparatory to his sending out an addendum to all members of the Church who have purchased his book. - -------------------- Jan. 7, 1960: 10:15 to 12:45 p.m. RE: The Book--"Mormon Doctrine". The First Presidency met with Elders Mark E. Petersen and Marion G. Romney. They submitted their report upon their examination of the book "Mormon Doctrine" by Elder Bruce McConkie. These brethren reported that the manuscript of the book "Mormon Doctrine" had not been read by the reading committee, that President Joseph Fielding Smith did not know anything about it until it was published. Elder Petersen states that the extent of the corrections which he had marked in his copy of the book (1067) affected most of the 776 pages of the book. He also said that he thought the brethren should be under the rule that no book should be published without a specific approval of the First Presidency. I stated that the decision of the First Presidency and the Committee should be announced to the Twelve. It was agreed that the necessary corrections are so numerous that to republish a corrected edition of the book would be such an extensive repudiation of the original as to destroy the credit of the author; that the republication of the book should be forbidden and that the book should be repudiated in such a way as to save the career of the author as one of the General Authorities of the Church. It was also agreed that this decision should be announced to the Council of the Twelve before I talk to the author. Elder Petersen will prepare an editorial for publication in the Improvement Era, stating the principle of approval of books on Church doctrine. A rough draft will be submitted to us for approval. - -------------------- Jan. 7, 1960 [part of a letter addressed to David O. McKay from Marion G. Romney, dated January 28, 1959]. The author is an able and thorough student of the gospel. In many respects he has produced a remarkable book. Properly used, it quickly introduces the student to the authorities on most any gospel subject. As to the book itself, notwithstanding its many commendable and valuable features and the author's assumption of "sole and full responsibility" for it, its nature and scope and the authoritative tone of the style in which it is written pose the question as to the propriety of the author's attempting such a project without assignment and supervision from him whose right and responsibility it is to speak for the Church on "Mormon Doctrine." Had the work been authoritatively supervised, some of the following matters might have been omitted and the treatment of others modified. A. References to churches and other groups who do not accept "Mormon Doctrine." 1. Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, who sometimes refer to themselves as "Josephites." (Exhibit II-1, pages 50, 141, 362) 2. "Christian Churches" generally. (Exhibit II-2, pages 139, 455) 3. "Catholic Church." (Exhibit II-3, pages 13, 66, 129, 130, 216, 241, 242, 314-315, 342, 346, 350, 422, 499, 511, 697) 4. Communists and Catholics. (Exhibit II-4, pages 26-7, 131) 5. Evolution and Evolutionists (Exhibit II-5, pages 37, 77, 136, 180, 228, 238, 659) B. Declaration as to "Mormon Doctrine" on controversial issues. 1. "Pre-Adamites." (Exhibit III-1, pages 17, 262) 2. Status of Animals and Plants in the Garden of Eden. (Exhibit III-2, pages 36, 234-35) 3. Meaning of the various accounts of Creation. (Exhibit III-3, pages 157-8, 167-8) 4. Dispensation of Abraham. (Exhibit III-4, page 203) 5. Moses as a translated being. (Exhibit III-5, pages 206, 445, 466, 727-8) 6. Origin of Individuality. (Exhibit III-6, page 404) 7. Defiling the priesthood. (Exhibit III-7, page 437) 8. Manner in which Jesus was Begotten. (Exhibit III-8, page 494) 9. Written sermons. (Exhibit III-9, pages 634-5, 716) 10. Resurrection of stillborn children. (Exhibit III-10, page 694) C. Miscellaneous Interpretations. (Exhibit IV) Frequency of Administrations, page 22 Baptism in the "molten sea," page 98 II Peter 1;19, page 102 Paul married, page 112 Status of those "with Christ in His Resurrection," page 128 Consecration of oil, page 147 Councils and schools among the Gods, page 151 Limitations on Deity, page 154 Sunday not a proper day for family reunions, page 254 Geological changes at the time of the deluge, page 268 The Holy Ghost a spirit man, page 329 Facing east in temples when giving the Hosanna Shout, page 337 Details on family prayer and asking the blessing on food, page 526 Interpretation of Doctrine and Covenants 93:1, page 581 Interpretation of "Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning," page 606 Status of little children in the celestial kingdom, page 607 Resumption of schools of the prophets, page 613 Time of beginning of seasons, page 616 Interpretation of III Nephi 21:20, page 618 D. Repeated use of the word "apostate" and related terms in a way which to many seems discourteous and to others gives offense. (Exhibit V, pages 123, 125, 160, 169, 212, 223, 383, 528, 538, 548, 596) - -------------------- Jan 8, 1960. The First Presidency held a meeting. We decided that Bruce R. McConkie's book, "Mormon Doctrine" recently published by Bookcraft Company must not be re-published, as it is full of errors and misstatements, and it is most unfortunate that it has received such wide circulation. It is reported to us that Brother McConkie has made corrections in his book, and is now preparing another edition. We decided this morning that we do not want him to publish another edition. We decided, also, to have no more books published by General Authorities without their first having the consent of the First Presidency. - -------------------- Jan. 14, 1960: Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency. Among matters discussed at this meeting were the following: Elder Mark E. Petersen's proposed editorial on books by General Authorities. A draft of a proposed editorial for the Improvement Era, prepared by Elder Mark E. Petersen, on the subject of selecting good books, and upon the approval of the publication of books by the First Presidency, was read. After consideration it was decided that the general statement, without the reference to "Mormon Doctrine" and "Ancient America and the Book of Mormon," which should be handled separately, would be a suitable editorial on the subject of selecting good books. Further action on the matter of publishing a statement relating to the approval of books by the First Presidency was deferred awaiting consideration of the subject by me with President Joseph Fielding Smith. - -------------------- Jan. 27, 1960: Conference with Pres. Joseph Fielding Smith re: Bruce R. McConkie's book, "Mormon Doctrine." At the request of the First Presidency, I called President Joseph Fielding Smith, and told him that we are a unit in disapproving of Brother Bruce R. McConkie's book, "Mormon Doctrine," as an authoritative exposition of the principles of the gospel. I then said, "Now, Brother Smith, he is a General Authority, and we do not want to give him a public rebuke that would be embarrassing to him and lessen his influence with the members of the Church, so we shall speak to the Twelve at our meetingt in the Temple tomorrow, and tell them that Brother McConkie's book is not approved as an authoritative book, and that it should not be republished, even if the errors (some 1,067 of them) are corrected." Brother Smith agreed with this suggestion to report to the Twelve, and said, "That is the best thing to do." I then said that Brother McConkie is advocating by letter some of the principles as printed in his book in answer to letters he receives. Brother Smith said, "I will speak to him about that." I then mentioned that he is also speaking on these subjects, and Brother Smith said, "I will speak to him about that also." I also said that the First Presidency had decided that General Authorities of the Church should not publish books without submitting them to some member of the General Authorities, and President Smith agreed to this as being wise. - -------------------- Jan. 28, 1960: 8:30 to 9 a.m. Bruce R. McConkie's book. Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency. I reported to my counselors that I had talked with President Joseph Fielding Smith about the decision that the book "Mormon Doctrine" should not be republished and about handling the matter to avoid undermining Elder McConkie's influence. President Smith agreed that the book should not be republished, and said that he would talk with Brother McConkie. It was decided that the First Presidency should inform Brother McConkie before he learns of our decision from some other source, so Brother McConkie was asked to come into our meeting this morning. When he arrived I informed him of the desire of the First Presidency with reference to his book not being republished, to which he agreed. The recommendation was also made that he answer inquiries on the subject with care. Brother McConkie said, "I am amenable to whatever you Brethren want. I will do exactly what you want. I will be as discreet and as wise as I can." In answering letters he said that he would express no views contrary to views which the First Presidency has expressed. He said that he would conform in every respect. 10 a.m. to 2:45 p.m. Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve in the Salt Lake Temple. At Council meeting I reported to the Brethren our decision regarding Elder Bruce R. McConkie's book "Mormon Doctrine," stating that it had caused considerable comment throughout the Church, and that it has been a source of concern to the Brethren ever since it was published. I said that this book had not been presented to anyone for consideration or approval until after its publication. I further said that the First Presidency have given it very careful consideration, as undoubtedly have some of the Brethren of the Twelve also, and that the First Presidency now recommend that the book not be republished; that it be not republished even in corrected form, even though Brother McConkie mentions in the book that he takes all responsibility for it; and that it be not recognized as an authoritative book. I said further that the question has arisen as to whether a public correction should be made and an addendum given emphasizing the parts which are unwisely presented or misquoted or incorrect; but it is felt that that would not be wise because Brother McConkie is one of the General Authorities, and it might lessen his influence. The First Presicdency recommend that the situation be left as it is, and whenever a question about it arises, we can answer that it is unauthoritative, that it was issued by Brother McConkie on his own responsibility, and he must answer for it. McConkie on his own responsibility, and he must answer for it. I reported that the First Presidency had talked with Brother McConkie this morning, and he said he will do whatever the Brethren want him to do. He will not attempt to republish the book, nor to say anything by letter, and if he answers letters or inquiries that he will answer them in accordance with the suggestions made by the Brethren, and not advocate those things concerning which question has been raised as contained in the book. The Brethren unanimously approved of this. I then said that the First Presidency further recommend that when any member of the General Authorities desires to write a book, that the Brethren of the Twelve or the First Presidency be consulted regarding it. While the author need not get the approval of these Brethren, they should know before it is published that a member of the General Authorities wants to publish a book. I said it may seem all right for the writer of the book to say, "_I_ _only_ am responsible for it," but I said "you cannot separate your position from your individuality, and we should like the authors to present their books to the Twelve or a Committee appointed." I asked the Brethren of the Twelve to convey this information to the other General Authorities. On motion this became the consensus of the Council.