Page 1 of 3
Member made doctrines
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 3:16 am
by 2bizE
What doctrines did you learn of growing up that turned out not to be doctrines after all?
Here are a few inlearned:
1) Playing cards are of the devil
2) Yoga is a an anti christ religion
3) Coke and Pepsi are forbidden. We drank Mt. Dew though for years until my parents learned it had caffeine.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 9:38 am
by Jeffret
2bizE wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2018 3:16 am
What doctrines did you learn of growing up that turned out not to be doctrines after all?
Here are a few inlearned:
1) Playing cards are of the devil
2) Yoga is a an anti christ religion
3) Coke and Pepsi are forbidden. We drank Mt. Dew though for years until my parents learned it had caffeine.
I'm not sure how you determine this category. Yoga didn't really become popular in Utah until after Church leaders learned it was wiser to not say anything direct but instead to just say vague platitudes. I don't know of anything regarding it that has come from official Church channels.
The other two, though, ....
There are lots of statements by Church leaders against playing cards. Here is one collection:
Playing Cards. Some prominent quotes:
Apostle Dallin H Oaks, 1972 wrote:One type of gambling that has been vigorously criticized by our leaders is card playing. Cards may, of course, be played without playing for money, but the relationship between card playing and gambling is so close and the practice of card playing itself partakes of so many of the disadvantages of gambling that card playing has come under condemnation regardless of whether or not gambling is involved.
Elder John A. Widstoe, 1942 wrote:It must be added that relaxation from the regular duties of the day is desirable and necessary for human well-being. Wholesome games of recreation are advocated by all right-minded people. Moreover, the objections [to playing cards] are not directed against the many and various card games on the market not employing the usual "playing cards." Most of these furnish innocent and wholesome recreation, and many are really instructive. It is true that they may be played to excess, but in fact it seldom happens. This is true even when such cards are used in games imitating those with "playing cards." It is true that such cards may be used for gambling purposes, but in fact it is almost never done. The pall of evil seems to rest upon the "playing cards" handed down to us from antiquity.
Spencer W. Kimball, 1974 wrote:We hope faithful Latter-day Saints will not use the playing cards which are used for gambling, either with or without the gambling. As for the gambling, in connection with horse racing or games or sports, we firmly discourage such things.
Joseph F. Smith wrote:Card playing is an excessive pleasure; it is intoxicating and, therefore, in the nature of a vice. It is generally the companion of the cigaret and the wine glass, and the latter lead to the poolroom and the gambling hall. . . . Few indulge frequently in card playing in whose lives it does not become a ruling passion. . . . A deck of cards in the hands of a faithful servant of God is a satire upon religion. . . . Those who thus indulge are not fit to administer in sacred ordinances
There aren't as many direct statements by Church leaders against Coke and Pepsi, but no lesser entity than BYU refused its sale for decades. Despite lots of requests they held firm on that dictate. It's hard to say BYU acts in any way that is not consistent with Church leaders' desires. The behaviors and situations at BYU have big impact on how things happen throughout the Church, by design.
There are some admonitions by Church leaders against caffeinated drinks. This article goes through a timeline of the WoW and mentions some of them:
Revelation Bias… Fair and Balanced Part 5c: The Word of Wisdom.
1917 – Frederick J. Pack of the University of Utah published an article in the Improvement Era dealing with Coca-Cola. The article discussed whether or not LDS members should drink Coca-Cola because it contained many of the “drugs” that were contained in coffee and tea. According to Frederick, the answer was no. (The Word of Wisdom: From Principle to Requirement”, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought page 7).
1922 – During Conference, Heber J. Grant stated, “I am not going to give any command, but I will ask it as a personal, individual favor to me, to let coca-cola alone. There are plenty of other things you can get at the soda fountains without drinking that which is injurious. The Lord does not want you to use any drug that creates an appetite for itself.”
From other sources there is this statement:
Seventy Sterling Sill wrote:“And one of the most damaging sins and one that gives greatest strength to our death instinct is the violation of that great revelation given 132 years ago called the Word of Wisdom. Some violators of this law tend to excuse themselves because it appears to be such a small thing. It seems like just a little disobedience, a little caffeine a little nicotine, a little friendly indulgence in alcohol. Yet these are the springboards to disease, broken homes, immorality, disloyalty to God, physical death, and the death of many of our eternal interests” (Sterling Sill, Conference Report, April 1965, p.88).
Or this response from Joseph Fielding Smith, President of the 12, advising people not to consume cola drinks:
http://i.imgur.com/qM1uWRr.jpg
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:56 am
by alas
I wondered about the "member made doctrines" just like Jeffret did, because as far as I knew, the rules about caffeinated soda and playing cards had both orriginated with general authorities. And I have never heard religious objections to yoga, but then we spent a good deal of time away from Utah, so if it was going around the members, I might have missed it.
But a lot of Pharasee type rules have come out of the mouths of GAs, and then the members take them as something they can do to prove righteousness, and we become more and more bogged down in counting the number of steps taken on the Sabbath.
The only "doctrine" that I know of that can be traced to a member rather than a GA, is that Heavenly Mother is hidden from her children because HF wants to protect her from us using her as a swear word. Us mothers of course think it is totally stupid because, yeah children are gonna swear at you, but you don't lock mama up and not let the children know she exists to protect mama, with daddy being the only parent they know about. Talk about abuse of both children and wife. Anyway, that stupid idea seems to trace back to a seminary teacher according to rumors on the Blogernackle.
But I know the GA now seem to be blaming the doctrine of blacks being unworthy in their first estate as why they could not have priesthood, onto members speculations. But I believe it can be traced to GAs, and it was taught as doctrine.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 11:28 am
by Jeffret
I've heard concerns about yoga from a number of conservative Christian people. Not necessarily any more from Mormons than any other conservative religious group. I've got an extended family member, very engaged and dutiful Mormon, who is a yoga instructor and teaches some classes at her Mormon church building. She's definitely not a conservative Mormon, though.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 11:48 am
by Ghost
Possibly in this category:
- God can read your mind but Satan can't (which perhaps could make praying aloud dangerous).
- People born in the latter days were leaders in the War in Heaven, and have it so much harder that others who lived earlier will revere them. (This one was attributed to Boyd K. Packer but specifically refuted by him.)
- People born with mental disabilities were already good enough that they don't require the trial of mortal life.
- The pre-mortal and post-mortal realms are the same place, as seen in Saturday's Warrior.
Oh, never mind about
that first one.
James E. Faust wrote:He cannot know our thoughts unless we speak them.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 7:02 pm
by mooseman
Sorry. Duplicate post.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 7:04 pm
by mooseman
A lot in Saturdays warrior, like soul mates, which SWK and ETB were vocal about, but took hold so much many leaders feel too many look for the one they are meant for rather than marry the first worthy member of the opposite sex they find.....
.....but wait! Didn't JSJ tell several women that they had been promised to him, EVEN IF THEY WERE ALREADY MARRIED?!
And there is the problem with "false member doctrine". Every doctine has flipped so drastically, so many "divine decrees" have been quietly allowed to be forgotten by younger generations, that those that find them, believe them, or remeber them are dismissed as "seeing beyond the mark".
For example, why Utah holds to execution by firing squad. BY said blood had to be spilt for them to attone their sins. JfS said:
"[T]he founders of Utah incorporated in the laws of the Territory provisions for the capital punishment of those who wil[l]fully shed the blood of their fellow men. This law, which is now the law of the State, granted unto the condemned murderer the privilege of choosing for himself whether he die by hanging, or whether he be shot, and thus have his blood shed in harmony with the law of God; and thus atone, so far as it is in his power to atone, for the death of his victim. Almost without exception the condemned party chooses the latter death." (Smith, Joseph Fielding (1957), "The Doctrine of Blood Atonement", Answers to Gospel Questions, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book: 180–91) He said that WHILE MY GRANDPARENTS WERE ALIVE!!! There are men in their late 60s and early 70s alive who heard this!
Now, Utah is talking About abolishing the death penalty all together. People in my generation who wrestle with it if its part of Gods plan are pointed to Pres Newsroom who said " (the lds church)neither promote nor oppose capital punishment." Then they laugh at the silly high priest and their false member orginated doctrine and vote to do away with it, happily knowing they arw doing Gods plan.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:47 pm
by Palerider
Jeffret wrote: ↑
1922 – During Conference, Heber J. Grant stated, “I am not going to give any command, but I will ask it as a personal, individual favor to me, to let coca-cola alone. There are plenty of other things you can get at the soda fountains without drinking that which is injurious. The Lord does not want you to use any drug that creates an appetite for itself.”
I believe the last remnants of actual cocaine were removed from Coca-Cola in about 1929. A good percentage was removed even earlier in the early 1900's. So Heber may have been operating under the assumption that many were at the time that Coca-Cola was still in reality a harmful drink.
Unfortunately later leadership fail to do adequate research and they hang on to old "counsel" because they can point to a picture on the wall of a dead "prophet" and say, "We do this cuz he said so..."
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 6:27 am
by Dravin
As pointed out, I'm not sure there is a clear distinction between abandoned teaching or admonition and 'member made doctrines'. You might point and laugh at the 'member' doctrine that Bigfoot is Cain, only to find it a story repeated by leadership. Or we can point to a huge list of things in the book Mormon Doctrine that influence member belief and came from a church leader despite how much current leadership might like to claim it is all silly notions the members pulled out of their backside in a vacuum (and that the book had never existed).
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 8:06 am
by Brent
David Archuleta rocks!
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 9:13 am
by alas
mooseman wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2018 7:04 pm
A lot in Saturdays warrior, like soul mates, which SWK and ETB were vocal about, but took hold so much many leaders feel too many look for the one they are meant for rather than marry the first worthy member of the opposite sex they find.....
.....but wait! Didn't JSJ tell several women that they had been promised to him, EVEN IF THEY WERE ALREADY MARRIED?!
And there is the problem with "false member doctrine". Every doctine has flipped so drastically, so many "divine decrees" have been quietly allowed to be forgotten by younger generations, that those that find them, believe them, or remeber them are dismissed as "seeing beyond the mark".
For example, why Utah holds to execution by firing squad. BY said blood had to be spilt for them to attone their sins. JfS said:
"[T]he founders of Utah incorporated in the laws of the Territory provisions for the capital punishment of those who wil[l]fully shed the blood of their fellow men. This law, which is now the law of the State, granted unto the condemned murderer the privilege of choosing for himself whether he die by hanging, or whether he be shot, and thus have his blood shed in harmony with the law of God; and thus atone, so far as it is in his power to atone, for the death of his victim. Almost without exception the condemned party chooses the latter death." (Smith, Joseph Fielding (1957), "The Doctrine of Blood Atonement", Answers to Gospel Questions, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book: 180–91) He said that WHILE MY GRANDPARENTS WERE ALIVE!!! There are men in their late 60s and early 70s alive who heard this!
Now, Utah is talking About abolishing the death penalty all together. People in my generation who wrestle with it if its part of Gods plan are pointed to Pres Newsroom who said " (the lds church)neither promote nor oppose capital punishment." Then they laugh at the silly high priest and their false member orginated doctrine and vote to do away with it, happily knowing they arw doing Gods plan.
So, using birth control being a decision between the husband and wife after prayer is a member invented doctrin. Because the church leaders were teaching birth control as a sin and the members first came up with the idea that it was none of the top leaders business, but only the business of the couple and maybe God.
Yeah, I think that qualifies as a member invented doctrine, because now the leaders have accepted it as official.
And I guess having a vasectomy without talking to your bishop first is also a member invented doctrine...just has not made it to the handbook yet.
And it was a bunch of women who worried about children running wild after school because there mothers were still working who came up with the idea of have a fun kind of classes to keep the kids busy and off the street and started primary. The leaders saw it was a good idea and adopted it church wide. Then later ruined it by putting it on Sunday so it was no longer fun, but really just Sunday School.
Church welfare program started with one bishop during the depression, but I don't remember the full story. But church leaders liked the idea and adopted it church wide.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 9:13 am
by deacon blues
A more recent example might be the "one piercing" rule promoted by Pres. Hinckley/Elder Bednar. This sounds like policy, rather than doctrine. Could it ever become a temple recommend question? Probably not, considering ramifications for converts, etc. And yet, Pharisaical tendencies in members, and the Church itself, might make it an inadvertent temple question, due to the nature of the "doctrine of obedience."
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:02 am
by 2bizE
deacon blues wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 9:13 am
A more recent example might be the "one piercing" rule promoted by Pres. Hinckley/Elder Bednar. This sounds like policy, rather than doctrine. Could it ever become a temple recommend question? Probably not, considering ramifications for converts, etc. And yet, Pharisaical tendencies in members, and the Church itself, might make it an inadvertent temple question, due to the nature of the "doctrine of obedience."
i remeber after this new "doctrine" was revealed, all the church schools had to update their hknor codes. It was so dumb, i remeber thinking. The prophet mentions some grandfatherly suggestion and the whole church had to change.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:05 am
by Lloyd Christmas
I had a couple of priesthood meetings where the leaders said oral sex was a sin, even after marriage because it was "unnatural." Talk about awkward priesthood lessons. Lol. Apparently it was in the church handbook for a year, then removed, but some leaders still teach it. I had a seminary teacher say open mouth kissing was a sin. Even after marriage.
Let's see also that blacks were less valiant or fence sitters in the pre existence.
Satan controls the water, which is why missionaries aren't aloud to swim.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:19 am
by NOMinally Mormon
Women should submit to their husbands. Now the FamProc says parents work together as equals (I don't remember the exact wording). But fathers still "preside".
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:25 am
by Jeffret
Lloyd Christmas wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:05 am
I had a couple of priesthood meetings where the leaders said oral sex was a sin, even after marriage because it was "unnatural." Talk about awkward priesthood lessons. Lol. Apparently it was in the church handbook for a year, then removed, but some leaders still teach it.
That certainly wasn't a member-created doctrine. That came from the top. One of the problems was that the commandment against oral sex was widely and strongly disseminated. And strongly worded. Whereas the subsequent reversal was not. Lots of people who saw the original never saw the reversal.
Lloyd Christmas wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:05 am
Let's see also that blacks were less valiant or fence sitters in the pre existence.
That certainly comes from church leaders.
Lloyd Christmas wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:05 am
Satan controls the water, which is why missionaries aren't aloud to swim.
And that one is essentially in the scriptures. The scriptures don't say that missionaries can't swim, but given the policy that's a reasonable interpretation, certainly one that church leaders don't do anything to dispel.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:33 am
by Jeffret
NOMinally Mormon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:19 am
Women should submit to their husbands. Now the FamProc says parents work together as equals (I don't remember the exact wording). But fathers still "preside".
And that's definitely another one created by Church leaders. Oh, sometimes Church leaders pay lip service to the idea that husband and wife form some partnership and some level of equality. But then they make sure to strongly insist on clearly separate gender roles and that the husband must preside. Some people are just more equal than others. They're terrified of any deviations becoming accepted in society or in the Church.
No less an authority than the temple ceremony insists that women submit to their husbands.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:54 am
by achilles
Dungeons and Dragons is Satan worship.
My mom threw all my D&D stuff away while I was on my mission. I was PISSED.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 11:04 am
by Jeffret
alas wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 9:13 am
So, using birth control being a decision between the husband and wife after prayer is a member invented doctrin. Because the church leaders were teaching birth control as a sin and the members first came up with the idea that it was none of the top leaders business, but only the business of the couple and maybe God.
Yeah, I think that qualifies as a member invented doctrine, because now the leaders have accepted it as official.
And I guess having a vasectomy without talking to your bishop first is also a member invented doctrine...just has not made it to the handbook yet.
And it was a bunch of women who worried about children running wild after school because there mothers were still working who came up with the idea of have a fun kind of classes to keep the kids busy and off the street and started primary. The leaders saw it was a good idea and adopted it church wide. Then later ruined it by putting it on Sunday so it was no longer fun, but really just Sunday School.
Church welfare program started with one bishop during the depression, but I don't remember the full story. But church leaders liked the idea and adopted it church wide.
These ones are particularly interesting as they were member-created ones that were subsequently accepted by the leaders. The birth control ones are examples of the leaders being dragged into more current ideas because the members just weren't willing to submit.
Re: Member made doctrines
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 11:09 am
by Jeffret
achilles wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:54 am
Dungeons and Dragons is Satan worship.
My mom threw all my D&D stuff away while I was on my mission. I was PISSED.
That one was part of the Satanic panic of the 80's and 90's. It was a general feature of conservative religion. Still is in some swaths of them. I don't know that Church leaders actually ever said anything against D&D but they did promulgate unfounded rumors and accusations as part of the Satanic panic.