- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Hi everyone! My great uncle was employed in the missionary department for years as was my best friend. The method they used to use (the 90’s, he has since retired and my friend quit) is much like what theindex said. They receive the papers and they are computerized (my friend used to do the data entry). They coordinate with each mission and the MTC to decide which missions will need new missionaries and which MTC classes can be scheduled. A list is then made of which missions and how many missionaries are needed. Then a GA reviews all the prospective missionaries papers and assigns them to a mission based upon that list. Sometimes they will take into account languages that are already spoken or family mission experiences (like parents or siblings who served in a specific country or language area) but that is not the rule, it kind of depends on the GA. I found out from my MTC group (again, in the 90’s) that nearly all had sent our papers in around the same date and all of us received our calls around the same date as well. as I recall, there was one exception. One elder had sent his papers a couple of weeks earlier than the rest of us. Not sure if his was delayed in the mail or if the missionary department delayed his for some reason. Not as inspired as I had hoped, but it is more practical than some other methods, I’m sure. Thank you HiJolly. Now help me here in case I am missing something and my old eyes just missed something in the article BUT the article in fact says absolutely nothing about how mission calls are handled, is that true? I read the whole thing, it does say that the computer system is used by about every branch of the Church including the First Presidency but nothing specific about missionary calls? Let me know if I have missed a paragraph (sigh, 🙄 in order to read the article I had to take off my glasses and get so close to the screen I could have left nose prints😆 ).However, if the above is true it is a very serious issue with Quinn’s whole process (see I can do it too!!!! one problem like steel swords in the Book of Mormon and the whole thing is untrue !!!!
😯 ) so if Quinn has literally “manufactured” a footnote then it is possible that all of his research is flawed and the massive flood of footnotes in all of his books is in question.We read Quinn’s book “The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins in Power” in my book club a few months ago. We discussed why Quinn has never been able to get a job since leaving BYU. I know there have been some rumors about Quinn being railroaded out of some jobs at Arizona State Univ because some rich Mormon boosters objected, but I don’t know how reliable that is. One of the guys in my book club said that he thinks some of Quinn’s footnotes don’t hold up to scrutiny. In the book, Quinn shows a photograph of the seer stone Joseph used to translate the Book of Mormon. My friend did some checking into the photograph, and it is not reliable, the location of said seerstone, the stone itself, as well as the photograph are in question. My friend thinks that some other universities aren’t satisfied with Quinn’s methods for producing papers. Of course, that is speculation. In the book, Quinn makes a statement that the real problem with the Nauvoo Expositor was not polygamy (as everyone thinks), but that Joseph was making alliances with foreign governments including England, the Republic of Texas (a foreign nation at the time), France, and Russia. Quinn claims that Joseph knew this could be considered treason, and didn’t want that information getting out. The polygamy info was just the same tired, old rumors that Joseph had been enduring for years. While I admit that William Law was concerned about Joseph’s theocracy, and think there might be some merit into what Quinn is saying, I have never heard this line of thought before. John Hamer, a pretty well-respected Mormon Historian (of the MHA and John Whitmer Historical Association) stopped by my blog, and I asked him what he thought of Quinn’s claims. He didn’t fully endorse this idea, but said that the Community of Christ generally respects Quinn’s scholarship. (I can’t find his exact comment on my blog, but it is there somewhere.)
Anyway, I did a blog post on Quinn’s claim about the Nauvoo Expositor, if anyone is interested. I really like Quinn, but I’m not sure everything he says can be fully endorsed. His info regarding the restoration of the Melchizidek Priesthood give 3 possibilities for dates, and I thought that info was pretty reliable. Here’s some additional reading on these 2 subjects.
http://www.mormonheretic.org/2009/05/10/the-nauvoo-expositor-a-different-perspective/ http://www.mormonheretic.org/2009/04/29/when-was-the-melchizedek-priesthood-restored/ Man MH, how can I be more like you!! That what I wanna know. Every time I get to reading a church history book, I get sidetracked by about 10 other fascinating books. Hence I’m still only about 1/4 of the way into RSR even though I’ve been reading it for 10 months. Bill Atkinson wrote:Thank you HiJolly. Now help me here in case I am missing something and my old eyes just missed something in the article BUT the article in fact says absolutely nothing about how mission calls are handled, is that true? I read the whole thing, it does say that the computer system is used by about every branch of the Church including the First Presidency but nothing specific about missionary calls? Let me know if I have missed a paragraph (sigh,
🙄 in order to read the article I had to take off my glasses and get so close to the screen I could have left nose prints😆 ).However, if the above is true it is a very serious issue with Quinn’s whole process (see I can do it too!!!! one problem like steel swords in the Book of Mormon and the whole thing is untrue !!!!
😯 ) so if Quinn has literally “manufactured” a footnote then it is possible that all of his research is flawed and the massive flood of footnotes in all of his books is in question.
You got it right, Bill. Not one word about the missionary department or mission calls. Yep.HiJolly
Thanks HiJolly for that confirmation, I needed to ask as I am at the stage where I need my glasses to drive and see outside but have to take them off if I want to read and the computer monitor is in that grey zone where most of the time I can use glasses ( 
So MH did you book club discussions ever come up with other footnotes that they found were as erroneous as this one we have just investigated? I am actually on your side here, I like reading Quinn too but now I am wondering just how loose he was with all those footnotes which afterall make up most of his books. It is a concern.
Bill, One of the guys in my book club is a history major, and he does check footnotes quite a bit. He had a lot of problems with Quinn, though the seer stone is the one I remember the most. I think many of Quinn’s claims are good, but others need to be checked. He can play loose with footnotes, as shown by this missionary article, though I do think he doesn’t do it all the time. Caution definitely needs to be exercised when reading Quinn.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.