Here are some more insights into the BRM "saga", written by Joseph Fielding McConkie:
Question: What was all the flap and fuss about Mormon Doctrine, anyway?
Response: The first edition of Mormon Doctrine, released in 1958, caused something of a stir by directly identifying Roman Catholicism as the “great and abominable church” spoken of by Nephi in the Book of Mormon. The authoritative tone of the book was also a concern, with the question being asked, “What right does Bruce McConkie have to speak for the Church?” The book came in for some criticism because of the strong language in which it denounced marginal practices among Latter-day Saints, such as card games in which face cards were used and family reunions that were held on the Sabbath.
Question: Is it true that President David O. McKay banned the book?
Response: In January 1960, President McKay asked Elder McConkie not to have the book reprinted.
Question: How is it, then, that the book was reissued?
Response: On July 5, 1966, President McKay invited Elder McConkie into his office and gave approval for the book to be reprinted if appropriate changes were made and approved. Elder Spencer W. Kimball was assigned to be Elder McConkie’s mentor in making those changes.
Question: Is this generally known?
Response: I don’t think so. I don’t know how people would be expected to know this.
Question: Haven’t you heard people say that Bruce McConkie had the book reprinted contrary to the direction of the First Presidency?
Response: Yes, but if they would think about it, that assertion does not make much sense. The publisher was Bookcraft, not Bruce McConkie, and Bookcraft was always very careful to follow the direction of the Brethren. It could also be noted that Mormon Doctrine was reissued in 1966, and its author was called to the Quorum of the Twelve in 1972. It takes a pretty good imagination to suppose that a man who flagrantly ignored the direction of the president of the Church and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles would be called to fill a vacancy in that body.
Whatever faults one might want to attribute to Bruce McConkie, no one who knew him could question his integrity or his discipline, particularly where matters of priesthood direction were concerned. Never in my life have I known a man who was more disciplined or obedient to priesthood direction. Bruce McConkie would have died a thousand deaths before he would have disregarded the prophet’s counsel or that of the Quorum of the Twelve. He was a man who, when assigned to speak in general conference for fourteen minutes and thirty seconds, would not have thought to speak fourteen minutes and thirty-one seconds. He took a stopwatch with him to conference and timed himself by it. For that matter, he made it a practice to watch carefully what other speakers did. When individuals went to him with concerns that fell outside the bounds of the authority or responsibility explicitly given to him, he simply refused to hear what was being said........
Question: How do you know President McKay directed your father to reprint Mormon Doctrine?
Response: My father told me that President McKay had so directed him. In addition to that, I am in possession of handwritten papers by my father affirming that direction.
Question: Did the first edition of Mormon Doctrine cause embarrassment to President McKay?
Response: Yes. The Catholic bishop in Salt Lake City, Bishop Hunt, communicated to President McKay his displeasure with the book and what it said about the Catholic church.
Question: What was Elder McConkie’s reaction to that criticism?
Response: He agreed that what he had written did not facilitate good relations with our Catholic neighbors. He stated, “It wasn’t smart on my part.” He had no reluctance in making the changes he made in the second edition of the book.
Question: So, at least originally, the First Presidency had concerns about Mormon Doctrine?
Response: Yes. One of those concerns was the title itself. There was some question about what business a Seventy had declaring the doctrine of the Church. It is interesting to note, however, that no suggestion was ever made that the title of the book be changed.
Question: Would it be fair to say that the First Presidency gave your father a good horsewhipping for some of the things he wrote in Mormon Doctrine?
Response: I think their concern was not as much with what he had written as that he had done it without seeking counsel and direction from those who presided over him. This was back in a day before the Brethren did much writing, and there was no established review system for what they did write. As to their giving him “a good horse whipping,” I think we can be confident that they were not shy in voicing their feelings. I have been told that when he met with the First Presidency, my father was invited to be seated but chose to remain standing. I also know that it was his practice (because he told me I was to do the same) when you are getting scolded, you offer no excuses—you just take it. After the experience President Moyle observed, “I’ve never seen a man in the Church in my experience that took our criticism—and it was more than criticism—but he took it better than anyone I ever saw. When we were through and Bruce left us, I had a great feeling of love and appreciation for a man who could take it without any alibis, without any excuses, and said he appreciated what we said to him.”
Question: So what kinds of things were omitted from the second edition of the book?
Response: In a number of instances, the first edition of Mormon Doctrine reached beyond the stated purpose of the book—the declaration of the doctrines of Mormonism—to include denouncing various Christian heresies. Entries included the veneration of Mary, or Mariolatry, penance, transubstantiation (the notion that in the sacrament the wafer and wine become the actual flesh and blood of Christ), indulgences, and supererogation, which is the teaching that some people perform more good works than are necessary for their salvation and thus their surplus can be sold to the wicked. This teaching provided the basis for indulgences. Because the purpose of the book was to identify Mormon doctrine, not to catalog heresies, in writing about these things, Bruce McConkie had strayed from his purpose. Hence, such subjects were dropped in the second edition....
Question: How extensive was Elder Kimball’s list of things that needed changing?
Response: There were about fifty items that Elder Kimball wanted Elder McConkie to revisit.
Question: Were these doctrinal matters in which he differed with Elder McConkie?
Response: No. They dealt with tone and with the wisdom of including particular things.
Question: How did Elder McConkie feel about the suggestions made by Elder Kimball?
Response: He was very appreciative. Elder Kimball was a wise mentor who taught him the difference between being right and being appropriate. The fact that something is true does not necessarily mean one ought to say it.
Question: Elder Kimball’s list of things that needed changing sounds much less extensive than the changes that were made in the second edition. Does this suggest that a wiser Bruce McConkie did a lot of rewriting on his own?
Response: Yes, it does.
http://www.meridianmagazine.com/books/0 ... onkie.html