Elder Snow: Why Essays Are Not Publicized

[Anonymous]

Quote:

Elder Steven E. Snow candidly explains why the LDS Gospel Topics Essays are not publicized by the LDS Church.

“Woven into the story, the history will be some of the issues that sometimes rise associated with church history and our doctrine. We try to cover those with some essays which are linked to lds.org under Gospel Topics. The Bretheren two years ago gave us twelve questions to answer. They included “Race and the Priesthood”, “Polygamy”, “The tranlation of the Book of Mormon”, on and on. Nine of those have now been answered and three questions remain to be answered and we are still working on those. We should conlude our work by the end of this year. If you haven’t had a chance to look at those essays, we’d encurage you to do so and share them with your friends. We are in the process of letting leaders, stake presidents and bishops know about them so they can be a resource in the event that some of their members are having questions or challenges about those issues. “Book of Abraham” essay was just released in July, that’s the most recent of the nine essays that have been publisched on-line.

I think it’d be helpful to know how we chose to roll those out. It was a soft roll out. There wasn’t an announcement saying “You can go to this website to learn everything weird about the Mormon church you ever wanted to learn”. (Laughter from the audience) But yet we had a lot of people struggling with some of these issues. We were loosing young people particularly. And we felt we owed a safe place for people to go to get these answered. So they were deliberately kind of placed in an existing database, so they wouldn’t …. You know, 90% of the church probably couldn’t care less, they don’t worry about such things. But we do have some folks who are on-line and we felt like they needed a safe place to go to get answers if they had questions. So I don’t think you are gonna see a well publicised campaign to tell you to go to these sites. But we just, you know, the people that are interested seem to kind of pass the word amongst themselves. And the only other thing is that leaders now will have access to them. And I think the long- probably the greatest long-term benefit will be: These are answers that have been vetted by the, reviewed by the Quorum of the Twelve and the First Presidency and they have signed off on these answers. And now curriculum and seminaries and institute can safely weave these essays into a future curriculum to in a sense “inoculate” is a word I use quite a bit for the rising generation. So, they can learn a little bit about these things without being totally shocked when they hear them for the first time. Does that make sense? (“yeah” from someone in the audience) Yeah, OK.

So, don’t expect a big campaign. I think there’s been a lot of interest within maybe a small percentage of church members but my view is most of the church really is not troubled, members are not troubled by these.”

Not sure where the recording was made (here is the link to the MP3 of it), but it sounds legit and it sounds like what I would expect a leader to say about them. Interesting that a few more are due out this year. Given they are taking a while longer on them it makes me wonder what the topics are.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

Nine of those have now been answered and three questions remain to be answered and we are still working on those. We should conlude our work by the end of this year.

Quote:

“Book of Abraham” essay was just released in July, that’s the most recent of the nine essays that have been publisched on-line.

The BoA essay was published on July 8, 2014 so I suspect Elder Snow made these comments in 2014 (the majority of the essays were published in that year). I could be wrong but I don’t think there are three more essays that are due to be released in 2016, I think it’s an old comment made by Snow that has been recently discovered and used as a “they admitted it” gotcha.

—

I don’t believe 90% of the church could care less is a good reason to not publicize the essays. There’s about 20 minutes of announcements during most PH opening exercises that I could care less about (or could be resolved in an email to the 2 people in the PH group that the announcement actually pertains to).

I think they understand that the information in the essays can be troubling because it can be very foreign to what has been taught in the past. They don’t publicize the essays because they recognize the information can cause issues and if someone isn’t currently having issues it would be best to not point them in the direction of something that could cause issues.

[Anonymous]

I don’t encourage my family and most of my friends to frequent this because they don’t need it, and they are happy in the Church – to varying degrees.

I see the essays the same way. They are important, and It is good that the local leaders are being told about them, but people who don’t need them don’t need them. I like the inclusion of the links in the online lesson manuals, and I hope more is done with them as time passes, but this is okay for now.

I’d also like a chance for the polygamy one to be revised before being distributed widely. If we want them publicized widely, we have to accept the bad along with the good. I’m not there yet.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

I’d also like a chance for the polygamy one to be revised before being distributed widely. If we want them publicized widely, we have to accept the bad along with the good. I’m not there yet.

AMEN to this one. The fact that they CANONIZED the reprehensible Law of Sarah is damning. How on earth could that make it through the vetting process?? Lack of empathy. Not acceptable.

I also agree with Ray that there are plenty of people in the church who just aren’t interested in this stuff. It’s not related to their reasons for being in the church at all. There was a great post by Andrew S about these three different “cultures” within the church: physical infrastructure, intellectual infrastructure, cultivation of relationships. Those in the second group are probably the main ones who even give a crap about this stuff. The first group see church mostly as a place to serve, and the third group are more focused on church as a part of being in a family that’s in the church.

http://www.wheatandtares.org/20221/seeing-mormon-faith-transitions-as-social-class-movements/

[Anonymous]

I’m sure there are many, many members who aren’t interested in the material the essays cover. That said, I don’t think Elder Snow should be deciding for people. To be clear, I’m not saying that he said this. I’m just saying that there’s no shortage of methods of getting the message out and the people that are interested can then follow up (I’m not extremely interested in Friends of Scouting but I hear about it ad nauseam for a few months out of the year) and the people that aren’t interested won’t follow up.

The best form of security is people not knowing that something even exists. I feel the essays weren’t publicized because they didn’t want to generate interest in the essays.

Making the essays a part of the gospel library and asking CES teachers to be familiar with them were steps in the right direction. Maybe the act of seeking the essays out is the barrier to determine who is and is not interested? That method seems to work for receiving continued revelation.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

there are plenty of people in the church who just aren’t interested in this stuff

Especially now. Many who were are gone and won’t be back. Essays or not.

At one time the essays meant a great deal to me. They were a light of hope. Now they are just dust in the wind. As time has passed I have realized that the essays alone won’t build the bridge I’d hoped. They can write as many as they like, but some key pieces will always be missing.

#1 – Why did the church need to publish/create essays? There is a story there that will never get told. No matter how broadly the essays are spread that story is what matters most.

#2 – The essays don’t explain their necessity. Are we re-scripting? Are we opening up to the type of membership Richard Bushman hopes to see? Are these to be used to help all of us grow in peace with each other?

#3 – After you read the essays – then what? Are we changing canon scripture? Is loving the 1832 First Vision equivalent with the present PofGP one? Can we denounce other things?

I still appreciate the effort. I even now understand how those 3 religious identities in Andrew S. piece make it hard to guide the ship. Ironically I never saw myself as an intellectual until we taught seminary. Somehow working there it felt imperative to get it right. Not just for the kids, but for Joseph, Emma, Brigham and us. For me now the essays are water under a bridge. Or under a bushel. Either way, they won’t give light.

[Anonymous]

mom3 wrote:

Quote:

there are plenty of people in the church who just aren’t interested in this stuff

Especially now. Many who were are gone and won’t be back. Essays or not.

At one time the essays meant a great deal to me. They were a light of hope. Now they are just dust in the wind. As time has passed I have realized that the essays alone won’t build the bridge I’d hoped. They can write as many as they like, but some key pieces will always be missing.

#1 – Why did the church need to publish/create essays? There is a story there that will never get told. No matter how broadly the essays are spread that story is what matters most.

#2 – The essays don’t explain their necessity. Are we re-scripting? Are we opening up to the type of membership Richard Bushman hopes to see? Are these to be used to help all of us grow in peace with each other?

#3 – After you read the essays – then what? Are we changing canon scripture? Is loving the 1832 First Vision equivalent with the present PofGP one? Can we denounce other things?

I still appreciate the effort. At first these felt like the church trying, but now I have come to feel they are just an attempt to placate a few people from leaving and maybe future “what do you mean we didn’t tell you! Didn’t you see the nearly hidden essays?” By and large the narrative/history is not being changed (we still have lessons on “14 fundamentals of following the prophet”). There may be some in church leadership that are trying to change things, but they are not winning the battle. For me these are way too little (substance) too late. It just feels to me they can’t have it both ways. The essays feel more like admitting ground that has already been lost for anyone with any critical thinking skill and an interest in history. It still is too little too late for me not to be counted as “one of the grandson’s being lost in order to keep a grandma’s faith intact” (see Richard Bushman saying it aloud)

[Anonymous]

He’s right that the majority of active people don’t care about the essays. I actually mentioned them in a priesthood lesson a few weeks ago I was roped into…our Ex-Bishop was really surprised and looked almost displeased when I mentioned them. I think he didn’t like that I had mentioned them at all — he is a 3 time Bishop, and 1 time SP member, and was a senior leader in the military and industry for decades. So, he has a “management mind”.

So, I’m not sure if TBM leaders appreciate our mentioning the essays in lessons to the rank and file members of the church. I know there was a Sunday School teacher who was released from his calling for teaching the priesthood ban disavowal essay to youth when they asked about Blacks and the priesthood. It was in the Tribune or other news source recently.

http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/2475803-155/mormon-bishop-dismisses-teacher-for-using

So, just because those essays are out there doesn’t mean they are welcome fare in lessons — at least, not to many local priesthood leaders. Use with caution.

[Anonymous]

Old Timer wrote:

I don’t encourage my family and most of my friends to frequent this site because they don’t need it, and they are happy in the Church – to varying degrees.

I see the essays the same way. They are important, and It is good that the local leaders are being told about them, but people who don’t need them don’t need them. I like the inclusion of the links in the online lesson manuals, and I hope more is done with them as time passes, but this is okay for now.

I’d also like a chance for the polygamy one to be revised before being distributed widely. If we want them publicized widely, we have to accept the bad along with the good. I’m not there yet.

I understand that this is a time of almost violent maturation of the church, but how does it work to inoculate all the young seminary-goers with the essays and have them go home to parents who – three, five, seven years in – don’t know beans about them?

I also think it was a mistake, most obvious in the polygamy essay, to finesse the facts to a ridiculous degree and “tell” us what to think of it all. And I hope they won’t confuse silence with acceptance. My mother was fourteen in Lutheran confirmation classes when the teacher said that, yes, unfortunately, the good man in India wouldn’t be saved because he didn’t know Jesus Christ. Mom came back to class day after day. She was confirmed. She graduated high school and went to college a Lutheran. The seed planted in her fourteen year-old mind – “This isn’t right. This can’t be God” – didn’t sprout until seven years later.

[Anonymous]

“to finesse the facts to a ridiculous degree and “tell” us what to think of it all” This cuts to the heart of something I’ve been thinking about after listening to some MI podcast or other. I used to think sola scriptura meant that the Bible was inerrant, but it’s actually a broader concept (even though Evangelicals who believe the Bible is inerrant ALSO believe in sola scriptura). What it really means is not “only scripture” but “scripture alone,” meaning without interpretation from the clergy, us personally interacting with scripture without being told what it means or what to think or what to feel. Some days that is really killing me.

[Anonymous]

Do you think it is wise to mention the essays in the course of a regular Sunday lesson? Or mention them to traditional believers who are content with their position in Fowler’s Stages of faith?

Based on the reaction I got last week from our former Bishop, I am not so sure. Elder Snow’s comment that they are for people who encounter doubts or contrarian literature, and their apparent tucking away in a remote corner of LDS.org seems to imply they are there, reluctantly…and not something the GA’s would like us to be focusing upon.

Do you think it is wise to mention them among the faithful? Would this be construed as actually detracting from faith, as the essays DO expose some facts that are not widely known, and could represent seeds of doubt that sprout years later…

[Anonymous]

“Wise” would depend on you motives or desired outcome. Elder Packer has essentially said, “keep a lid on this stuff”. It seems to me the longer we keep the lid on it, the greater the reaction of people down the line saying, “I have been lied to!”

Maybe a different question might be, “what do you think would happen if I brought up the essays more to my TBM’ish friends via lessons and in my conversation?”

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

Do you think it is wise to mention the essays in the course of a regular Sunday lesson? Or mention them to traditional believers who are content with their position in Fowler’s Stages of faith?

Based on the reaction I got last week from our former Bishop, I am not so sure. Elder Snow’s comment that they are for people who encounter doubts or contrarian literature, and their apparent tucking away in a remote corner of LDS.org seems to imply they are there, reluctantly…and not something the GA’s would like us to be focusing upon.

Do you think it is wise to mention them among the faithful? Would this be construed as actually detracting from faith, as the essays DO expose some facts that are not widely known, and could represent seeds of doubt that sprout years later…

My understanding is that the essays are supposed to be incorporated into the long awaited (and still waiting) revision of the adult Sunday School curriculum. I recognize that Seminary is different, but it is also my understanding they are already incorporated into Seminary. I understand what you’re saying about bringing them up in current lessons, there is that danger of resistance rejection – but LDS.org does say it is an official outlet of the church. Also, as posted on another thread this morning, the essays are also now in the Gospel Library app, also an official publication of the church. And they’re not all that hard to find there, second item under Church History (third item is the FV accounts).

I would bring the essays up where appropriate in lessons, but frankly the opportunity rarely presents itself.

[Anonymous]

I know the reaction I got from our HP group was varied. There was one person who knew about the Bloggernacle and knew about the essays. Nodded his head vigorously when I mentioned it — a young guy. I wonder if he is in a partial faith crisis or not….One person looked startled that I said it. The others didn’t have a clue.

I suppose mentioning them in passing isn’t a bad idea until they grow on people, just the way the church has released them in a quiet corner of LDS.org. They could be fitting on lessons of missionary work — when you get anti-Mormon objections, lessons on the priesthood when the topic broaches them, and when people ask point blank questions.

I haven’t been asked to teach priesthood since then. perhaps I crossed the line. The good news is that I’m not sad about it

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

I haven’t been asked to teach priesthood since then. perhaps I crossed the line. The good news is that I’m not sad about it

😆

Shortly after the Race and the Priesthood essay was released an opportunity to share the essay in my ward presented itself during PH. Somehow the discussion turned into discussing the familiar justifications for the ban. Someone even shared an experience where divine intervention prevented an ordination. The perfect opportunity to share:

“Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.”

But the tone of the class… I got the feeling that it wasn’t the right time. I guess you had to be there.

[Author]

Posts