Page 1 of 1
Sacrament Talks - disclaimers needed?
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:47 am
by _Drifting
In the very recent and high profile case of Bottgate the Church once again distanced itself from what a member had stated publicly concerning the doctrinal position of the Church.
That got me thinking (well that and a very white and delightsome Latte).
Every Sunday at Sacrament Meeting members are assigned to get up and do exactly what Bott got up and did. Namely, publicly give their own interpretation, speculation and opinion on an aspect or doctrine of Mormonism. There must be a plethora of non doctrinal views given all over the planet on any given Sunday.
So, prior to each Sacrament Meeting shouldn't the presiding Priesthood Holder read a short disclaimer to the congregation making it clear that what they are about to hear doesn't necessarily reflect the official position of the Church and therefore, should be treated as the personal speculation and opinion of the speaker?
Come to think of it, shouldn't a disclaimer be read out before General Conference because we know from history that some of it will be discounted as personal speculation and opinion at some point in the future...
*slurp*
Re: Sacrament Talks - disclaimers needed?
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:32 am
by _moksha
"Although inspired in part by true incidents, the following stories are fictional and do not depict any actual persons or events. No animals were sacrificed during these General Conference proceedings."
Re: Sacrament Talks - disclaimers needed?
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:52 am
by _Drifting
Perhaps a permanent sign on every pulpit saying...
WARNING
The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the position of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (sometimes called the Mormon or LDS Church). The views expressed by individual speakers are their sole responsibility and do not necessarily represent the doctrines or teachings of the Church; and as such may need to be considered personal opinion and speculation.
Re: Sacrament Talks - disclaimers needed?
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:08 am
by _ludwigm
"For risks and side effects please read MDB!"
Re: Sacrament Talks - disclaimers needed?
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:59 pm
by _bcspace
Come to think of it, shouldn't a disclaimer be read out before General Conference because we know from history that some of it will be discounted as personal speculation and opinion at some point in the future...
No need. If one questions what is taught, one merely has to find it in an official publication to verify it (or not) as official doctrine. If not doctrine, one will have to decide if one wants to incorporate into one's beliefs and not ascribe it to the Church. If opposed to doctrine, then one will have to decide how much of an apostate one wants to be.
Re: Sacrament Talks - disclaimers needed?
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:00 pm
by _subgenius
Drifting wrote:In the very recent and high profile case of Bottgate the Church once again distanced itself from what a member had stated publicly concerning the doctrinal position of the Church.
That got me thinking (well that and a very white and delightsome Latte).
Every Sunday at Sacrament Meeting members are assigned to get up and do exactly what Bott got up and did. Namely, publicly give their own interpretation, speculation and opinion on an aspect or doctrine of Mormonism. There must be a plethora of non doctrinal views given all over the planet on any given Sunday.
So, prior to each Sacrament Meeting shouldn't the presiding Priesthood Holder read a short disclaimer to the congregation making it clear that what they are about to hear doesn't necessarily reflect the official position of the Church and therefore, should be treated as the personal speculation and opinion of the speaker?
Come to think of it, shouldn't a disclaimer be read out before General Conference because we know from history that some of it will be discounted as personal speculation and opinion at some point in the future...
*slurp*
http://www.LDS.org/ensign/1993/12/rando ... r?lang=enghttp://www.LDS.org/service/teaching-the ... k?lang=enghttp://www.LDS.org/service/teaching-the ... e?lang=eng
Re: Sacrament Talks - disclaimers needed?
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 6:58 pm
by _Alfredo
bcspace wrote:No need. If one questions what is taught, one merely has to find it in an official publication to verify it (or not) as official doctrine. If not doctrine, one will have to decide if one wants to incorporate into one's beliefs and not ascribe it to the Church. If opposed to doctrine, then one will have to decide how much of an apostate one wants to be.
subgenius wrote:http://www.LDS.org/ensign/1993/12/random-sampler?lang=eng
http://www.LDS.org/service/teaching-the-gospel/prepare-a-talk?lang=eng
http://www.LDS.org/service/teaching-the-gospel/principles-and-methods-of-teaching/teach-the-doctrine?lang=eng
Ha. What are you two trying to suggest?
There are rules for giving and evaluating talks concerning official doctrine?
If one questions, these rules are available?
But clearly, there is something very relevant about the idea of a disclaimer.
Funny. I thought there would be no discussion of disclaimers if members always followed rules and asked all relevant questions.