What is and isn't doctrine?

[Moksha]

I'll pose a question to the boad: Is wearing a white shirt and tie while passing the sacrament a commandment, doctrine, suggestion, or what?

A suggestion based upon a personal preference is my guess. Sort of like horseradish sauce - I like it but some do not.

[Hemidakota]

This is not doctrine and does not need to be. Now read carefully the words of both Elder Jeffrey R. Holland and President David O. McKay:

May I suggest that wherever possible a white shirt be worn by the deacons, teachers, and priests who handle the sacrament. For sacred ordinances in the Church we often use ceremonial clothing, and a white shirt could be seen as a gentle reminder of the white clothing you wore in the baptismal font and an anticipation of the white shirt you will soon wear into the temple and onto your missions.

That simple suggestion is not intended to be pharisaic or formalistic. We do not want deacons or priests in uniforms or unduly concerned about anything but the purity of their lives. But how our young people dress can teach a holy principle to us all, and it certainly can convey sanctity. As President David O. McKay taught, a white shirt contributes to the sacredness of the holy sacrament (see Conference Report, Oct. 1956, p. 89).

LDS.org - Ensign Article - “This Do in Remembrance of Meâ€

Edited June 12, 2008 by Hemidakota

[Hemidakota]

Then, we can ask the same line of question, is it doctrine to wear our best attire to the temple?

[Snow]

I understand you are younger than I am and so we are at a different place in life, but now that you mention it... I don't really look to the prophet to figure out what I should be doing. It's not like I ignore instruction when I receive it but I think for the most part I do what is right (try to) whether the Brethren said to or not.

VisionofLehi,

As I reread my post I want to clarify. I don't think I am any more prone to doing right of my own accord (without having been told by the Brethren) than you or anyone else is.

[Hemidakota]

Acceptable....

During this months one of many conferences, Virgina area, Christine [Olsen] made mentioned that most members who still keeps questioning the prophets:

"Once you stop putting question marks behind the prophet's statements and put exclamation points instead, and do it, the blessings just pour."

[Moksha]

Then, we can ask the same line of question, is it doctrine to wear our best attire to the temple?

Good question, since one changes attire anyway.

[Hemidakota]

LOL....good one. Is wearing temple clothing doctrine?

[VisionOfLehi]

Snow: No worries, I understood what you meant.

GoodK: Living Prophet > Other prophets.

Doesn't mean it's all doctrine, but they clarify doctrine, and occasionally pronounce "new" doctrine. I say "new" because it really falls in line with old stuff, it's just that old laws are realized to encompass new meanings... Line upon line.

[Misshalfway]

I remember a story by Truman G Madson about Joseph Smith. Anybody listen to his lectures about the life of Joseph? Anyway, he talked about Joseph getting dressed up like a vagabond and going to interview new converts boarding the fairy on the Mississippi. He basically said he was the prophet, but not to forget that he was a flawed human too. I think that there is a great lesson here.

The Spirit is the safety net for everthing. even for our leaders who are the weak things of the world but who are trustworthy enough for such responsibility. The Spirit is really the thing we follow. And when the brethren speak truth, the HG will confirm.

[GoodK]

Snow: No worries, I understood what you meant.

GoodK: Living Prophet > Other prophets.

Doesn't mean it's all doctrine, but they clarify doctrine, and occasionally pronounce "new" doctrine. I say "new" because it really falls in line with old stuff, it's just that old laws are realized to encompass new meanings... Line upon line.

Can you help me understand something a little better? Do you think that everything a prophet or general authority says is doctrine?

[Misshalfway]

Can you help me understand something a little better? Do you think that everything a prophet or general authority says is doctrine?

I actually don't. I think there are times when they speak by the spirit. GC is one of those occasions. Their words can be considered scripture. Other talks or comments of GA's can be considered good counsel or truthful, wise advise and direction. But since most of them are such incredible examples of integrity, it is difficult not to trust their words. But do the make mistakes, misstep, mis-state things or act too zealously at times? Yes. They are human beings who fail and falter and who try better and get better and wiser as they grow. Just like the rest of us.

Is that any excuse for us? Heck no. Because we have the spirit, we are responsible.

[GoodK]

I actually don't. I think there are times when they speak by the spirit. GC is one of those occasions. Their words can be considered scripture. Other talks or comments of GA's can be considered good counsel or truthful, wise advise and direction. But since most of them are such incredible examples of integrity, it is difficult not to trust their words. But do the make mistakes, misstep, mis-state things or act too zealously at times? Yes. They are human beings who fail and falter and who try better and get better and wiser as they grow. Just like the rest of us.

Is that any excuse for us? Heck no. Because we have the spirit, we are responsible.

I'm not saying they make mistakes, misstep, or mis-state things. I'm just saying sometimes they are speaking as Elder so and so instead of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

[skalenfehl]

Apostles and prophets are the voice of the Lord, but as Ezra Taft Benson said, a prophet does not have to say "Thus sayeth the Lord" for something to be doctrine. Furthermore, not everything they declare is doctrine per se, but counsel, or further light and knowledge or principles of truth nonetheless. The prophets give counsel, commandments and doctrine, and it is the Spirit that confirms the truth of it to us so there can be no disputation.

Doctrine

1 archaic : teaching, instruction

2 a: something that is taught

b: a principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief : dogma

c: a principle of law established through past decisions

Not everything that comes from God through the voice of a prophet is law pertaining to doctrine (Law of Chastity, Law of Sacrifice, Law of Consecration, etc), but is a principle of truth and therefore is doctrine.

This is where the Pharisees and doctors of the law stumbled in ancient days. They were so focused on points of the laws that they completely missed the principles of truth behind them and cried blasphemy every time Christ instructed them.

[Misshalfway]

I'm not saying they make mistakes, misstep, or mis-state things. I'm just saying sometimes they are speaking as Elder so and so instead of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Perhaps we are saying the same thing. :) This above phrase says it best I think.

[Misshalfway]

Apostles and prophets are the voice of the Lord, but as Ezra Taft Benson said, a prophet does not have to say "Thus sayeth the Lord" for something to be doctrine. Furthermore, not everything they declare is doctrine per se, but counsel, or further light and knowledge or principles of truth nonetheless. The prophets give counsel, commandments and doctrine, and it is the Spirit that confirms the truth of it to us so there can be no disputation.

Doctrine

1 archaic : teaching, instruction

2 a: something that is taught

b: a principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief : dogma

c: a principle of law established through past decisions

Not everything that comes from God through the voice of a prophet is law pertaining to doctrine (Law of Chastity, Law of Sacrifice, Law of Consecration, etc), but is a principle of truth and therefore is doctrine.

This is where the Pharisees and doctors of the law stumbled in ancient days. They were so focused on points of the laws that they completely missed the principles of truth behind them and cried blasphemy every time Christ instructed them.

Absolutely.

[VisionOfLehi]

I don't know what all is considered doctrine when a leader of the Church speaks, and what isn't.

I don't want to try and draw an obviously line, though. Calling stuff "doctrine" seems to be too closed case. People will get too focused on what is and isn't doctrine, and then stick to just obeying doctrine and not listening to the rest...

But they're appointed to teach us, and to tell us what we're doing wrong, and how to do it right. And I do believe THAT's doctrine.

And over all the Scriptural history, not heeding the "advice" of prophets has never yielded positive results.

[Snow]

I don't know what all is considered doctrine when a leader of the Church speaks, and what isn't.

I don't want to try and draw an obviously line, though. Calling stuff "doctrine" seems to be too closed case. People will get too focused on what is and isn't doctrine, and then stick to just obeying doctrine and not listening to the rest...

But they're appointed to teach us, and to tell us what we're doing wrong, and how to do it right. And I do believe THAT's doctrine.

And over all the Scriptural history, not heeding the "advice" of prophets has never yielded positive results.

(bold added).

Yes - that is doctrine in the sense of the definition of being something taught. But that isn't the sense that most of us mean when we say "doctrine" ... being those unchanging principles of eternal gospel truth.

[Snow]

In the Oct 1880 General Conference, President George Q, Cannon said:

"I hold in my hand the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and also the book, The Pearl of Great Price, which books contain revelations of God. In Kirtland, the Doctrine and Covenants in its original form, as first printed, was submitted to the officers of the Church and the members of the Church to vote upon. As there have been additions made to it by the publishing of revelations which were not contained in the original edition, it has been deemed wise to submit these books with their contents to the conference, to see whether the conference will vote to accept the books and their contents as from God, and binding upon us as a people and as a Church."

Later changes to the Standard Works have likewise been submitted to the membership for a sustaining vote. It is that sustaining vote that makes teachings and principle "official doctrine" and binding on upon the Church.

Until something is made official and binding, it is commentary, not doctrine. That is not to say it isn't true or inspired but the Church has a clear protocol to specify the sources of binding and official doctrine.

[VisionOfLehi]

18 Howbeit that he made the greater star; as, also, if there be two spirits, and one shall be more intelligent than the other, yet these two spirits, notwithstanding one is more intelligent than the other, have no beginning; they existed before, they shall have no end, they shall exist after, for they are gnolaum, or eternal.

19 And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another more intelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am more intelligent than they all.

There's always someone greater than us: Always someone we can learn from, to lead us and guide us. Eternal gospel truth