Journal of Discourses - Isn't it scripture anymore?

[_Gazelam]

I found this short article about the Journal, take it for what you will:

by Gerald E. Jones

Many queries come from students concerning the Journal of Discourses, first published in England between 1853 and 1886. The original intent of their publication was to provide income for George D. Watt. their stenographer and publisher. Many Church members in England desired to read the sermons delivered by the General Authorities of the Church in Utah, and Brother Watt's books filled that need. He obtained clearance from the First Presidency I June 1853. Addressed to Elder Samuel Richards, missionary printer in England and to "the Saints abroad," this statement introduced the first volume:

"Dear Brethren--It is well known to many of you, that Elder George D. Watt, by our counsel, spent much time in the midst of poverty and hardships to acquire the art of reporting in Phonography [shorthand], which he has faithfully and fully accomplished; and he has been reporting the public Sermons, Discourses, Lectures delivered by the Presidency, the Twelve, and others in this city, for nearly two years, almost without fee or reward. Elder Watt now proposes to publish a Journal of these reports, in England, for the benefit of the Saints at large, and to obtain means to enable him to sustain his highly useful position of Reporter. You will perceive at once that this will be a work of mutual benefit, and we cheerfully and warmly request your cooperation in the purchase and sale of the above named Journal, and wish all the profits arising therefrom to be under the control of Elder Watt." (Signed by Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, and Willard Richards.)

The first four volumes were reported by Elder Watt, but after that other reporters are included - one a sister, Julia Young. Brother Watt reported through volume 12, when David W. Evans became the prime reporter. He was followed by George W. Biggs, a secretary to the First Presidency.

In considering the reliability of the Journal of Discourses, we should remember certain circumstances.

Though the First Presidency endorsed the publication of the Journal there was no endorsement as to the accuracy or reliability of the contents. There were occasions when the accuracy was questionable. The accounts were not always cleared by the speakers because of problems of time and distance. This was especially true during the persecution of the 1880s, which finally forced the cessation of publication.

We should remember that the times were different then. A principal concern of the early Saints was physical survival. Sermons often dealt with the practical problems of the time and so may seem quaint in our day, even if much of the advice is still valid.

Doctrinally, members of the Church were growing and learning. Most adults were converts who had to unlearn and relearn many doctrines. They were learning things that our children learn in Primary and Sunday School. Remarks were frequently impromptu. Close, friendly audiences frequently invited informal discussion of varied topics. There was occasional speculation about doctrines that have since been determined unimportant or even misleading.

The general membership of the Church has progressed in knowledge of gospel principles, which is as it should be. In our organizations, we have been taught the gospel for more than one hundred years now. Because of modern revelation and because of "line-upon-line, precept-upon-precept" progression, we have answers that were not yet given when the Journal of Discourses was published.

We also should be aware of priorities in our studies. It seems to me that we should first become very familiar with the four books of scripture accepted as standard works. The words of our current living prophet are also most valuable for us in our time. The official statements of the First Presidency are standards for doctrine and practice in the Church. We should be familiar with the manuals and courses of study provided for us in our day. For further inspiration and instruction by the General Authorities, we should study general conference addresses, beginning with the most current and moving back in time.

Even after digesting these materials, some persons may still have time and inclination to peruse the Journal of Discourses. We can be grateful that records of the early sermons were kept to help us understand the growth of the Church and the testimonies of our early leaders. If we find the time to read them, however, we should avoid getting caught up in their uniqueness and should concentrate on the inspiring thoughts and experiences related to us by choice men.

Having taught seminary and institute classes for more than thirty years, I have tried to follow my own advice. Because I also love to read, I have read the scriptures many times, all of the general conference reports, and finally, all volumes of the Journal of Discourses. Frankly, one of the main reasons I read the Journal of Discourses was so I could answer students' questions about them with some knowledge of what they were about. Though I enjoyed reading them, gained some new insights, and was inspired by the spirit of the early Brethren, except for the needs of students, there was no practical benefit that I could not have obtained from current conference talks with less effort, much greater clarity, and more economy. For me, the most pertinent discussion of gospel doctrines and answers to life's problems and source of spiritual inspiration in today's world comes from the standard works and our living prophets.

A Sure Foundation, Answers to Difficult Gospel Questions, p. 199-201
Copyright 1988 by Deseret Book Company

http://www.lightplanet.com/Mormons/response/qa/seer_jd.htm

[_Inconceivable]

It is referenced in all currently accepted church publications

"Special Witnesses" quote from it on a regular basis.

But the Stake President warned me to stop reading between the quotes...

I believe personally that you have brought up two good subjects. First I don't believe any Stake President has the right to ask you not to study any book or reach your own conclusions on that book. And second it is scripture that we are commanded by God to search for mysteries...

[/quote]

Gramps,

The first visit I had with the stake president, I started out by telling him that I realized that, as a Latter day Saint, I've been admonished not to search too deeply into the histories of the church (paraphrased). He was taken aback and asked me where I had heard such a thing. He then quoted a few of the verses that you did. At that point I felt like I might find some common ground with him. By the way, I do consider him a friend and one that has an anxious love and concern for every one his life comes in contact with.

However, after a few visits with me over a period of 6 months, he was succesfull in researching enough doctrinal material about avoiding the histories that it filled an entire talk at the subsequent stake conference. His last admonishment to me was to avoid researching through the internet. He blamed much of my "misinformation" on the internet.

As many of us know, the history that shakes most LDS from the moorings of the church's foundation are found in the words of the apostles and prophets dictated to loyal scribes called and set apart specifically for that purpose. It was never the occasional slip of the pen that broke my faith, it was the consistant and disturbing patterns of deceipt.

It cracks my mind that some of the most intelligent people can use oxymorons like, "..true, however", "..absolutely, notwithstanding..", "I know, although..", "there is no question in my mind, even though..", "there is no doubt, regardless of.."

I was taught that acceptance of the church doctrine was "all or nothing" my entire life - absolutes: "If Joseph Smith is a prophet, then the church is true..". The leadership refuses to hold all revelation and modern scripture to this precise and absolute standard.

To be a TBM, one must be willing to accept only what the current leadership pick and choose from previous modern prophets.

If I hadn't read the truth for myself, I would still be valiant in the cause.

[_dilettante]

I would actually love to hear the reasoning for the JOD being considered scripture, or for that matter, anything from General Conference.

[_Jason Bourne]

Whats the problem here? I have no problem with the Journal of Discources. I use quotes from it all the time here.

Heres one:
"With us the Bible is the first book, the Book of Mormon comes next, then the revelations in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, then the teachings of the living oracles" - Brigham Young, JD 9:297, May 25, 1862

Whats the cause of all the hubbub?

Yep. Accept you declared BY a flase prophet as far as who he thought God was.

[_Dakotah]

"Most believers I know consider the Conference edition of the Ensign to be scripture."

Even when the video recorded conference talk and the reported printed conference talk are different?

[_The Nehor]

I'm suspending judgment on the JofD until I'm finished. Currently in the middle of Volume 5.

[_Yoda]

I'm suspending judgment on the JofD until I'm finished. Currently in the middle of Volume 5.

I think the key with the JoD is to read it in the context it was written.

One thing that frustrates me about anti-Mormon sites is that they take the JoD out of context.

Now, granted, there are a lot of things in there that I consider to be pure balderdash(I'm in the Celestial Forum...I'm being good...LOL).

That being said, however, there is still an earnestness that is often lost when it is taken out of context.

[_The Nehor]

I'm suspending judgment on the JofD until I'm finished. Currently in the middle of Volume 5.

I think the key with the JoD is to read it in the context it was written.

One thing that frustrates me about anti-Mormon sites is that they take the JoD out of context.

Now, granted, there are a lot of things in there that I consider to be pure balderdash(I'm in the Celestial Forum...I'm being good...LOL).

That being said, however, there is still an earnestness that is often lost when it is taken out of context.

I agree with that. The joy of the Journal of Discourses so far for me has been it's unguarded nature. They speak and they say what they think. Much more theory in it than General Conference today where one comment that can be interpreted differently is seen as just context for crucifying the Gospel as a whole.

I just finished rereading a talk by Brigham Young about why some people are drawn to the Church. It's message is timeless and I'd love to hear more on this point in General Conference.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

As far as the OP question about it "being scripture anymore," The topic should define what scripture is, that is crucial to the discussion.

I've also been reading through the JoD, I'm almost to Vol. 4. I've been blogging some of the things I find applicable to us today, and I've found a lot. As The Nehor said, it is very candid. At times speakers specifically mention that they are speculating, or that they don't know such-and-such. When it comes to admonishing Saints in the JoD it holds a surprising amount of water even for our day.

Unforunately, quote miners like the Tanner s, et al. will search and take whatever they can find to make the JoD look ridiculous.

I have been extracting parts of discourses I disagree with, or feel disagree with current Church doctrine as I understand it. Out of over 1200 pages I've found about 15 or so to include in the extraction. That's not bad.

Brigham, in vol. 2:179-

"In my conversation, I shall talk and act as I please. Still I am always aware, when speaking in public, that there are those present who are disposed to find fault with this people, and to try to raise a prejudice against them; and they will pick up isolated words and sentences, and put them together to suit themselves, and send forth a garbled version to prejudice the world against us. Such a course I never care anything about; for I have frequently said, spoken words are but wind, and when they are spoken are gone; consequently I take liberties in speaking which I do not allow when I commit my sentiments to writing."

He knew what was up.

My blog can be found at www.lifeongoldplates.blogspot.com

[_haleray]

This is what the Encyclopedia of Mormonism says
Journal of Discourses

The Journal of Discourses was a sixteen-page semimonthly subscription publication privately printed in Liverpool, England, in 1854-1886. It served as the printed word of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, particularly for members who had no access to the Salt Lake City Deseret News. While the Journal most often published sermons of Church leaders, these speeches were not always considered official statements of doctrine. Many different kinds of speeches were printed, including the prayer given at the laying of a cornerstone of the Salt Lake Temple, a report of a high council court decision, a funeral sermon, and a plea for the defendant and the charge to the jury in a murder trial. In all, the collected Journal of Discourses contains 1,438 speeches given by fifty-five people, including Presidents of the Church, members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, members of the seventy, and sixteen other speakers. Brigham Young gave 390; John Taylor, 162; Orson Pratt, 127; Heber C. Kimball, 113; and George Q. Cannon, 111. Twenty-one people gave a single speech, and the rest gave from 2 to 66 speeches. The semimonthly issues have been bound into twenty-six annual volumes and are currently available in a lithograph reprinting "of the original edition."

The origin of the Journal of Discourses is tied to George D. Watt, an English convert baptized in 1837 by Heber C. Kimball. Before immigrating to the United States in 1842, Watt learned Pitman shorthand. He used this new skill in his adopted land to record the proceedings of conferences of the Church. He also recorded the trial of the accused murderers of the Prophet Joseph Smith.

After 1852 Watt transcribed Church conference addresses for the Deseret News. But because the News was not generally available outside central Utah and because Watt received little pay for his work, he proposed to publish privately and sell sixteen-page semiweekly issues of the Journal of Discourses containing selected sermons of the General Authorities. The sale of these to the Saints at large would enable Watt to earn a living with his shorthand skill. He was supported in this proposal by Brigham Young, who authorized him to print his sermons.

David W. Evans, also an English convert, an associate editor of the Deseret News, and the first violinist in the Salt Lake Theatre Orchestra, succeeded Watt as the main reporter to the Journal from 1867 to 1876. Another major reporter was George F. Gibbs, who was born in Wales and was the secretary to the First Presidency of the Church for fifty-six years. In all, twelve people reported sermons for the Journal of Discourses, including one of Brigham Young's daughters, "Miss Julia Young," who reported one of his speeches.


In Comprehensive History of the Church, by B.H. Roberts:
While these discourses are not held by the church to be final authority on the subjects of which they respectively treat, they are, nevertheless, regarded as profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, and , in the main are sound both in doctrine and ethics” (4:96:68)

Donald Q. Cannon in BYU Studies:
There are some sermons published in the Journal of Discourses the authenticity of which has been disputed. . . For instance, some of the sermons attributed to Joseph Smith, the Prophet. They were taken down at the time in longhand and have been published in the Journal of Discourses and there have been disputes as to their correctness. (BYU Studies, Vol. 18, No. 2, 192).
To summarize, the Journal of Discourses may have been the Ensign in that day, but there were mistakes made in the editing process, and we all need to be aware of that.