From: Scot Denhalter Date: 03 Jun 1997 10:40:33 -0600 Is anybody aware of any scholarly, or otherwise objective research that has been done on why people leave the LDS Church? H. Preston Bissell Scot Denhalter "What's another word for 'thesaurus' ?" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: On leaving the church Date: 03 Jun 1997 15:33:09 -0700 (PDT) Preston, you asked about studies about people leaving the church. Below are citations for two studies, copies of which I have in my files. 1) Albrecht, Stan L, Marie Cornwall, and Perry H. Cunningham. "Religious Leave-Taking: Disengagement and Disaffiliation Among Mormons"; pp 62 - 80. In: Bromley, David G. (Editor), _Falling Away From The Faith: Causes and Consequences of Religious Apostacy_, Sage Publications, 1988. 2) Albrecht, Stan L. and Howard M. Bahr. "Religious Disaffiliation Among Mormons", Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol 22, No. 4, Dec 1983, pp. 366 +. Hope these help. Dave "The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more Dave Combe star systems will slip through your fingers." dcombe@rain.org - Princess Leia ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-lds-research@xmission.com Date: 03 Jun 1997 20:51:12 -0600 [160.32.2.250]) by sawdust.cvfn.org (8.6.9/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA21134; = Tue, 3 Jun 1997 21:16:55 -0500 cc: lds-research@xmission.com In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=3DUS-ASCII Sender: owner-lds-research@xmission.com Precedence: bulk On Tue, 3 Jun 1997 dcombe@rain.org wrote: >=20 > Preston, you asked about studies about people leaving the church. = Below > are citations for two studies, copies of which I have in my files. >=20 > 1) Albrecht, Stan L, Marie Cornwall, and Perry H. Cunningham. = "Religious > Leave-Taking: Disengagement and Disaffiliation Among Mormons"; pp 62 - = 80. > In: Bromley, David G. (Editor), _Falling Away From The Faith: Causes = and > Consequences of Religious Apostacy_, Sage Publications, 1988. >=20 > 2) Albrecht, Stan L. and Howard M. Bahr. "Religious Disaffiliation = Among > Mormons", Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol 22, No. 4, = Dec > 1983, pp. 366 +. >=20 > Hope these help. >=20 Thanks much. Now, I'll have to see if I can find these publications = locally. HPB ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scot Denhalter Subject: Re: On leaving the church Date: 03 Jun 1997 20:33:24 -0600 Preston, Dave is mailing me copies of these articles. I will scan them and send them as ASCII attachments to all LDS-Research subscribers. Scot Denhalter "What's another word for 'thesaurus' ?" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-lds-research@xmission.com Date: 03 Jun 1997 22:35:18 -0600 [160.32.2.250]) by sawdust.cvfn.org (8.6.9/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA21134; = Tue, 3 Jun 1997 21:16:55 -0500 cc: lds-research@xmission.com In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=3DUS-ASCII Sender: owner-lds-research@xmission.com Precedence: bulk On Tue, 3 Jun 1997 dcombe@rain.org wrote: >=20 > Preston, you asked about studies about people leaving the church. = Below > are citations for two studies, copies of which I have in my files. >=20 > 1) Albrecht, Stan L, Marie Cornwall, and Perry H. Cunningham. = "Religious > Leave-Taking: Disengagement and Disaffiliation Among Mormons"; pp 62 - = 80. > In: Bromley, David G. (Editor), _Falling Away From The Faith: Causes = and > Consequences of Religious Apostacy_, Sage Publications, 1988. >=20 > 2) Albrecht, Stan L. and Howard M. Bahr. "Religious Disaffiliation = Among > Mormons", Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol 22, No. 4, = Dec > 1983, pp. 366 +. >=20 > Hope these help. >=20 Thanks much. Now, I'll have to see if I can find these publications = locally. HPB ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scot Denhalter Subject: [LDSR] Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 13:11:42 -0600 Date: 14 Jun 1997 13:26:20 -0600 >From sdenhalt@xmission.com Sat Jun 14 12:42:32 1997 Received: from slc252.modem.xmission.com [166.70.1.158] by mail.xmission.com with smtp (Exim 1.62 #2) id 0wcxmR-0000Cd-00; Sat, 14 Jun 1997 12:42:32 -0600 Received: by slc252.modem.xmission.com with Microsoft Mail id <01BC78BE.68172D40@slc252.modem.xmission.com>; Sat, 14 Jun 1997 12:28:04 -0600 Message-ID: <01BC78BE.68172D40@slc252.modem.xmission.com> Encoding: 1 TEXT This is a test. Testing; one, two, three. Do you copy? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-lds-research@xmission.com Date: 14 Jun 1997 18:45:14 -0600 (8.8.5/8.7.5) with SMTP id OAA14648; Sat, 14 Jun 1997 14:33:55 -0600 (MDT) cc: "'lds-research@xmission.com'" In-Reply-To: <01BC78C4.85EDAB40@slc252.modem.xmission.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-lds-research@xmission.com Precedence: bulk Hey, Scot, I'm here--but I'm not sure about anyone else! I called USHS to see if they had any provinance information about "Discursive Remarks" and I should have a full report next week. Will Bagley ****************************** Sorry for using you as my Ginea-Pig, Will. I don't know why all the header info came as part of the message with the first test I did. I will try to send this message now and see if it arrives "sans" header info. Thank you for your patience, folks. Not only am I new at this, I am also naturally predisposed to being a bit of a schlemeel. Scot ******************************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-lds-research@xmission.com Date: 15 Jun 1997 11:05:14 -0600 I often hear people say that the scriptures tell us the Lord will never allow a prophet to lead us astray, that He would take the prophet's life rather than allow this to happen. Sender: owner-lds-research@xmission.com Precedence: bulk I always ask for the scriptural reference to this concept, but no one has ever been able to provide it. Do any of you know where, in the scriptures or in modern prophetic utterances, such an assertion is made? Thanks in advance for any help you can give me with this. Scot Denhalter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scot Denhalter Subject: [LDSR] Scriptural or Cultural? Date: 15 Jun 1997 10:30:22 -0600 I often hear people say that the scriptures tell us the Lord will never allow a prophet to lead us astray, that he would take the prophet's life rather than allow this to happen. I always ask for the scriptural reference to this concept, but no one has ever been able to provide it. Do any of you know where, in the scriptures or in modern prophetic utterances, such an assertion is made? Thanks in advance for any help you can give me with this. Scot Denhalter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scot Denhalter Subject: RE: [LDSR] Scriptural or Cultural? Date: 15 Jun 1997 16:38:09 -0600 ---------- Sent: Sunday, June 15, 1997 11:43 AM >I often hear people say that the scriptures tell us the Lord will never >allow a prophet to lead us astray, that He would take the prophet's life >rather than allow this to happen. They're taking it from Wilford Woodruff's conference address of 6 October 1890, quoted in a footnote to the Manifesto (Official Declaration -- 1): "The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty." Ardis AEParshall@aol.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scot Denhalter Subject: RE: [LDSR] Scriptural or Cultural? Date: 15 Jun 1997 16:40:20 -0600 ---------- Sent: Sunday, June 15, 1997 1:07 PM ___ Scot ___ | I often hear people say that the scriptures tell us the Lord | will never allow a prophet to lead us astray, that He would | take the prophet's life rather than allow this to happen. | | I always ask for the scriptural reference to this concept, | but no one has ever been able to provide it. Do any of you | know where, in the scriptures or in modern prophetic | utterances, such an assertion is made? ___ It depends upon what you mean and how you interpret the comments. Those who don't appreciate the idea tend to devalue the concept by saying that it is nothing more than a Mormon form of infallibility. This is unfortunate as I don't think anyone believes in either prophetic infallibility nor anything akin to it. Thus among those who *do* accept the view, this "change" of meaning simply makes their objections silly or irrelevant. Among those who do tend to believe the view there are two main interpretations. The first is that in the "big picture" the prophet will never lead the church into apostasy. Thus the prophet may make numerous mistakes and even have false beliefs or teachings, but that in his role as leader the church will never fall sufficiently to destroy a significant doctrine, lose authority, or lose the ability to be led by Christ. A second view is that this simply means that the Lord will not allow a prophet to knowingly go against His revelations. Thus if, for example, the Lord had revealed polygamy and Joseph didn't want to do it, the Lord would send an angel or the like to make sure Joseph did do it or else kill Joseph. As most are aware there is a popular account of Joseph and an angel with a sword that deals with just this view. That view is significant as it then feels that Wilford Woodruff's and later Joseph F. Smith's change of the practice of polygamy must have been inspired, otherwise the angel with the sword might come back. There are of course variations of all these views. And I suppose there actually are some people who take a Catholic-like view of infallibility as well. As for references to the concept, other than the one accompanying OD-1 in the D&C there are the following. Notice that most of these are from Brigham Young. The Lord Almighty leads this Church, and he will never suffer you to be led astray if you are found doing your duty. You may go home and sleep as sweetly as a babe in its mother's arms, as to any danger of your leaders leading you astray, for it they should try to do so the Lord would quickly sweep them from the earth. Your leaders are trying to live their religion as far as they are capable of doing so. (Brigham Young, JD 9:289) President young Preached one of the most interesting discourses ever Delivered to the people. It was a sermon of sermons. Contained much interesting doctrine, Revelation & principle. He said the Lord would not permit him nor any other man to lead this people astray. If the leaders were to do wrong the Lord would take them away. If an Apostle did not magnify his Calling the Lord would remove him & not permit him to lead the people astray. But I shall not apostatize. You need not any of you look for that for I had the promise long ago that I should not do that. Neither shall I go to hell. (Wilford Woodruff Journal, July 28 1861) Here is the later, more famous quote, by Woodruff. And the Latterday Saints throughout Israel should understand that the first Presidency of the Church And the Twelve Apostles are led and guided by the inspiration of the Lord And the Lord will not permit me nor any other man to lead the People Asstry. (Wilford Woodruff Journal, 5 November 1891) Here are a couple related quotes. When fear comes upon the people that Bishop or President is leading them astray and introducing evil among them, it proves to me that the people are wrong and destitute of the power of their holy calling. They are willingly deceived. It is folly to say that community of Saints who are living up to their callings can be led astray by their Bishop or President. there is no such principle in all the kingdoms God has made. (Brigham Young, JD 7:278) I actually have an archive laying around somewhere that has a rather long evolution of the concept, with quotes saying the same thing by nearly all the Presidents of the chruch. So Woodruff wasn't alone in the teaching. Having said that, we should qualify it with a few other comments of Brigham to put it in perspective. What a pity it would be if we were led by one man to utter destruction! Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a recless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually. (Brigham Young, JD 9:150) Is the wife tried because her husband wishes to dictate her and give her good and wholesome advice? Is somebody tried because his bishop wishes to control him for his good? Your bishop is very likely doing the best he can to advise the members of his ward for their best good. Does he advise you to do wrong? All the members of that ward who are full of faith and the power of God will be of one heart and mind with their bishop, and will go with him in all things, and while union continues in the Lord He will cause every move they make to culminate for the greatest good to that people and the cause of truth. If bishop counsels the people of his ward to swear shall they swear? No. If he counsels them to steal shall they steal? No. If he counsels them to lie and bear false witness shall they do these wrongs? No. If he teaches them to break the Sabbath shall they break the Sabbath? No. If bishop or any other officer in this Church shall counsel the people to violate any of the laws of God, and to sustain and build up the kingdom of this world, I will justify them, and the Lord will justify them in refusing to obey that counsel. But if they counsel you to do right, which they do, take their counsel. (Brigham Young, JD 12:164) There are plenty of quotes along the above lines. On the other hand, the above doesn't entail criticizing leaders who don't do what we think they ought. The following quote, also by Brigham, illustrates this rather well. (It's a favorite of mine - too bad they don't talk like this in conference anymore.) The first name I shall present to you is that of Brigham Young, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If any person can say that he should not be sustained in this office, say so. If there is no objection, as it is usual in the marriage ceremony of the Church of England, "Let them for ever afterwards hold their peace," and not go snivelling around, saying that you would like to have a better man, and one who is more capable of leading the church. (Brigham Young, JD 7:228) /// Clark Goble //// cgoble@fiber.net /// No phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon. -- John A. Wheeler ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scot Denhalter Subject: [LDSR] Studies on Divorce Among Mormons Date: 15 Jun 1997 16:55:04 -0600 ---------- Sent: Sunday, June 15, 1997 12:58 PM I previously asked if anybody was aware of any published research on the reasons people become inactive in the Mormon Church, and I received a good article in response to this request. I used it as the basis for my lesson in HP group this morning. It stimulated a very interesting discussion. It also stimulated another question: Is anybody aware of any published research on divorce among Mormons? H.P.Bissell ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scot Denhalter Subject: [LDSR] RE: Scriptural or Cultural? Date: 15 Jun 1997 22:41:55 -0600 ---------- Sent: Sunday, June 15, 1997 2:21 PM On Sun, 15 Jun 1997 11:05:14 -0600 owner-lds-research@xmission.com writes: >I often hear people say that the scriptures tell us the Lord will >never allow a prophet to lead us astray, that He would take the prophet's >life rather than allow this to happen. I think I have heard this before - I just can't remember where. But I don't think it was in the cannon of scripture. Some that are close include: Elder Ballard in 94 "We will not lead you astray. We cannot." Pres. Faust in 96 " the LDS president "will never mislead the Saints." Then there are the comments of Pres. Tanner and the Primary Pres. --Doug ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard Livingston Subject: Re: [LDSR] Scriptural or Cultural? Date: 15 Jun 1997 14:50:15 -0600 >>> Scot Denhalter 06/15/97 10:30AM >>> >I often hear people say that the scriptures tell us the Lord will never >allow a prophet to lead us astray, that he would take the prophet's life >rather than allow this to happen. >I always ask for the scriptural reference to this concept, but no one has >ever been able to provide it. Do any of you know where, in the scriptures >or in modern prophetic utterances, such an assertion is made? It was Wilford Woodruff who became famous for the statement. Here are 7 instances from 1889-1891 where he made public statements to that effect. 1) But I will say this to my brethren and sisters, in the name of Israel's God: The Almighty will never permit me, nor any other President who holds the keys of the Kingdom of God, to lead you astray. If I do not walk in the paths of righteousness and do what is right in the position that I occupy, He will remove me out of my place, or any other man who attempts to lead the people astray. The position which I occupy, and that occupied by my brethren the Apostles, should not have a tendency, if we have the Spirit of God, to make us lifted up or exalted in our spirits before the Lord. I know, as the God of Israel lives, that I have no power, nor have I had, in this Church, to perform any work pertaining to this Kingdom until it has been given unto me by the God of heaven. I know Joseph Smith had not, nor Brigham Young, nor John Taylor, nor any Apostle or Elder in this Church and Kingdom. And the moment that I attempt to become lifted up in the pride of my heart, because of any position that I hold, that moment I become a very unwise man. So with anyone else. The higher our position the more our responsibility. During the little time I may spend here in the flesh, I stand in need of the prayers of the Latter-day Saints, of those who have faith in God. So do my brethren that surround me. So do all the authorities of the Church. We all stand in need of the Holy Ghost and the power of God. Without this we are not qualified to fill the positions which we are called to occupy. -Collected Discourses, Vol.1, Wilford Woodruff, April 7, 1889 2) There are men to-day, there will be men till the coming of the Son of Man, I expect, who feel as though they ought to lead the Church, as though it is not going right--that this, that, and the other is wrong. I say to all Israel at this day, I say to the whole world, that the God of Israel, who organized this Church and kingdom, never ordained any President or Presidency to lead it astray. Hear it, ye Israel, no man who has ever breathed the breath of life can hold these keys of the kingdom of God and lead the people astray. -Collected Discourses, Vol.1, Wilford Woodruff, June 2, 1889 3) Let us make up our minds to serve and honor God. Do not have any fears concerning the kingdom; the Lord will lead that aright; and if Brother Woodruff or any of the Presidency of this Church should take any course to lead you astray, the Lord will remove us out of the way. We are in the hands of the Lord, and those keys will be held and taken care of by the God of Israel until He comes whose right it is to reign. -Collected Discourses, Vol.1, Wilford Woodruff, June 2, 1889 4) It is my faith that the Lord will never permit any man upon whose shoulders He places the authority and power to lead Israel, to go astray, or to lead the children of God from the path of duty. The Lord would remove such a man from his place. -Collected Discourses, Vol.2, Wilford Woodruff, August 3rd, 1890 5) I say to Israel, the Lord will never permit me nor any other man who stands as the President of this Church, to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty. -Collected Discourses, Vol.2, Wilford Woodruff, Oct. 6th, 1890 6) God has led this Church from the beginning, by prophets and inspired men. He will lead this Church until the scene is wound up. He will neither permit me nor any other man to lead this Church astray. If I turn from the commandments of God and attempt to lead the people astray, the Lord will remove me out of my place, for the Lord has set His hand to lead this people by revelation and by inspired men. The Lord has "chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; * * and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are." We feel our weaknesses. I wish myself that I were a better man than I am. Of course, I have endeavored to do about the best I could in my weak way. I still wish to do so. But I am dependent upon the Lord and upon the prayers of the Saints, the same as my brethren. I pray God to bless you and me. I pray that He will seal upon the hearts of the Saints of God the teachings that we have heard during this conference. This is my prayer in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. -Collected Discourses, Vol.2, Wilford Woodruff, August 10, 1891 7) Now, the inspiration of the Lord will reveal to any person which course wisdom would dictate us to pursue. And the Latter-day Saints throughout Israel should understand that the First Presidency of the Church and the Twelve Apostles are led and guided by the inspiration of the Lord, and the Lord will not permit me, nor any other man, to lead the people astray. -Collected Discourses, Vol.2, Wilford Woodruff, October 25, 1891 Hope that helps. -Richard T. Livingston ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scot Denhalter Subject: [LDSR] Addressing Posts Date: 15 Jun 1997 23:22:08 -0600 Honorable LDS-Research Subscribers: There are some posting their questions or responses to . All questions and responses should be sent to . If you send something to "list-owner", I have to do hand-stands to get it to the list, and even then it looks to all the list subscribers as if your post is coming from me. Sending a post to "list-owner" also raises a problem of confidentiality. I never know whether such a message is meant for my eyes only or if it is meant for everyone on the list. From now on, I will assume that any post sent to "list-owner" is meant only for me and will not forward it on to the list. Thanks, Scot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: [LDSR] Orson Spencer Date: 16 Jun 1997 10:40:19 -0500 I sent this last week, but apparently it never went through. I apologize to anyone who may have received this already. If you did get it and did reply, please resend your reply to me personally - I did not get it. Kent I have not received any mail from lds-research since I signed up. I assume this is just because no-one has gotten the ball rolling. It seems to me that the best way to start is for those on the list to indicate their current research interests. For the past several years I have been researching the life of an ancestor of mine, Orson Spencer. A lot of my research has covered the circumstances surrounding the publication of 'Spencer's Letters,' which I like to call the first Missionary discussions. The initial letter in Spencer's Letters was a query from Spencer's Massachussettes associate, Reverend William Crowell, the editor of the _Christian Watchman_, a Baptist paper in Boston Massachusettes. (Orson Spencer was a Baptist minister in Mass. when he was converted to Mormonism.). Crowell sent the letter to Spencer in Nauvoo not long afterward, asking details of the Mormons and of Spencer's family and conversion. Crowell indicated in the letter that he might be willing to publish Spencer's reply in the _Christian Watchman_. I, of course, wanted to see if Spencer's response was published in the _Christian Watchman_. The _Christian Watchman_ was archived on Microfilm as part of the American Newspapers project (I think that is the name of it) and is available at many University libraries. The relevant numbers of the _Christian Watchman_ do not contain the letter, and they also reveal the reason why. About the time that Crowell would have received the response, he was dismissed as editor of the _Christian Watchman_ (because of an ownership change, if memory serves me correctly - I can check my notes at home). I am still looking for other avenues of research on this and other matters associated with Spencer - but I am concentrating on Spencer's time before he joined the Church in 1840. This includes time at the Hamilton Theological institution (now part of the Baptist theological institution in Rochester) and his time at one of the predecessors of Colgate University. Spencer also taught school in Washington, Georgia for a year. Research questions include: *To what extent did Baptist theology of the time influence Spencer in writing Spencer's Letters? * Does Crowell have any papers, diaries, etc. available that mention Spencer or Mormons? *What spiritual event happened to Crowell in Georgia that led him to become a minister? Of course, if anyone has any thoughts about all this, I'd be pleased to hear from you. Kent Larsen Kent S. "Kip" Larsen II; KLarsen@panix.com or KLarsen@NorthSouth.com (work). Pass the SPAM ban! Ask your Congressperson to support CAUCE http://www.cauce.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "'owner-lds-research@xmission.com'" Subject: [LDSR] List Submission Protocols Date: 16 Jun 1997 17:18:18 -0600 I recently forwarded a post to this list containing really nothing more than a couple of incomplete references. Although I, myself, didn't find the post very useful, I waffled on the protocols stated in this list's "info file" and forwarded the post on to the list anyway. I was afraid to hurt feelings. Then I received the following message from one of you which has put some spine into my resolve. "I would like very much to see comments such as the attached moderated out of the list. I don't intend to sound nasty, but comments that include 'I think I have heard this before - I just can't remember where. But I don't think it was ...' are not an aid to research. There are already dozens of lists for "off the top of my head" commentary; if this list heads down that path, I'll have to opt out. Note that I don't necessarily disagree with the writer (although the OD1 in the D&C is pretty strong evidence to the contrary). I just don't think the comment belongs on a research list that, by its charter, should prohibit 'Well _I_ think...' or 'My seminary teacher said...' or 'Someone heard a general authority say...' contributions." This subscriber is correct. There are many lists to which one has the freedom to opine without the burden of citing relevant quotations or references. This list is not one of them. I originally set up this list because I was tired of the idle chit-chat so prevalent on other lists. This subscriber has reminded me that there are others out ther who feel the same way. I will, in the future, be less of a coward and apply more stringently the rules of moderation. Please do not respond to _this_ message by posting to the list. In this case, it is appropriate to respond to the list owner. Cordially, Your Lilly-livered Moderator. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jeff.needle@general.com (Jeff Needle) Subject: [LDSR] Brigham Young & Portalnd, ME Date: 17 Jun 1997 00:39:00 GMT Hello, all. I hope this is the right place to ask this question. If not, I hope someone will direct me in the right way. I'm looking for some documentation on an effort by Brigham Young to establish a headquarters of sorts in Portland, Maine. Does anyone have anything on this? Thanks! .. nfx v3.1 jeff.needle@general.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: wlbagley Subject: Re: [LDSR] Orson Spencer Date: 16 Jun 1997 19:59:56 -0600 (MDT) Kent, I don't have anything on Spencer's early years, but I do have this. Readers will note this is part of my Brannan project. Any information on the subject will be appreciated. Young now sent Brannan and Orson Spencer on a delicate political mission to the Illinois capital at Springfield. Spencer and Brannan met with Governor Thomas Ford in his office in the state house where they "held a familiar interview for several hours." Former governor Reynolds (is this Thomas Reynolds of Missouri? Check Illinois info) warned Spencer that the people had "rudely resisted his efforts" to plead the Mormon cause, and "he was seriously afraid they would mob us by making an attack by the cooperation of steamboats upon our city." Both governors cautioned Spencer and Brannan "that our political influence was that which exasperated the people." Ford promised to protect the Mormons and their leaders as best he could, but admitted that "large masses of people that might assembled for violent and tumultuous purposes could not be retrained by any law or government."1 Brannan counseled moderation and advised the Mormon leader to "exclude such doctrines" as would alienate potential political allies. He mourned his lack of writing skill and, quoting "the old Quaker woman" and "the Hoosier," demonstrated his decided fondness for folk wisdom. Brannan to Young, 2 June 1845, Brigham Young Papers, MS 1234, LDS Archives. Springfield, June 2, 1845 [Salutation?] I have just returned from an interview with the Editor of the State Register,2 he informing me that the doctrines held forth in the Neighbor by brother Taylor3 "That no civil process for debt be etc shall not from the United States Marshall, shall not be served upon him, nor any other citizen of Nauvoo, until the General Government has Coerced [sic] the State of Illinois and Missouri has been the means of driving from the Coach[?]. He says he has been our friend from the begin[n]ing, and will continue to be so as long as such doctrines as the above are not set forth in the Neighbor. He says he replied to the article, but Br. Taylor did not receive it in the spirit that it was written but came out against him, and joined the Warsaw Signal, but he says he is willing to make allowances for Br. Taylor owing to the Carthage massacre. He has let his feelings get the better of his judgment but he says the Neighbor is looked upon as an official organ, and the whole society will be considered responsible for its doctrines, and if you wish him to advocate your cause, you must exclude such doctrines, for the United States has no power to coerse [sic] this State or Missouri either. Now whether he be wright [sic] or wrong, a mild course on our part will be sure to win us the barrel [battle?] [for] "there is more flies caught with molasses than vinegar" the old Quaker woman said. Since brother Spencer left I have had another interview with the Gov. [Thomas Ford] and with Gov. Runnels [Reynolds] & Gov. Anderson, who is the United States Marshal, Judge [Stephen A.] Douglas, Mr. Lambert and the Editor of the Register and they are all professedly our friends, and you may rest assured that the power of keeping down a mob is in our own hands. I wish I could only be with you for one hour. I can talk much pla[i]ner than I can wright. They say that the Carthagenians could not raise a mob of 500 men let them do their best. Lambert tells me that the Laws Higbies and Robbinson4 have told him wonderful tales about Nauvoo, and the Wife system but he does not believe them. He designs visiting Na[u]voo in a couple of weeks. Make friends with the Register by all means-better have him speak for us than against us. He is a smart fellow and very candid, and says he dont care a dam for public opinion if we will only be careful and not publish such strong doctrine and drive him from the tack. Take my word for it the political aspect of things in this state could not be bettered in our behalf, considering the circumstances, and if we persue [sic] a mild and judicious course, the victory must be ours. I leave this evening for St Louis. My love to the quorum, and may God bless you all and I know he will. I remain your obedient servant S. Brannan Excuse my bad writing, if I should write from now till dooms day I should write wright no better, it is not because I am too lazy to learn, but as the Hoosier said it is not in me. 1 Smith, Jr., History of the Church, 7:423 24. 2 Who is this? 3 John Taylor was editor of the Nauvoo Neighbor, which published this editorial when? May 1845? 4 William and ? Law, Francis Higbee, and Ebenezer Robinson? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: Re: [LDSR] Orson Spencer -Reply Date: 17 Jun 1997 11:51:56 -0500 At 8:18 AM -0700 on 6/17/97, ROY SCHMIDT wrote: > Kip, > > Are the Spencer letters published? Where can they be accessed? > > Roy They were first published by Orson Spencer in England while he was Mission President as tracts. Later, they were published in book form in both Utah and England for a number of years. I believe they have been out of print since the 1890s I've been toying with putting together an academic edition (adding footnotes, etc.), but the project seems very large. I think it could be promoted as the 1st Missionary Discussions! (I haven't found anything predating Spencer's Letters that could be considered discussions) Kent Kent S. "Kip" Larsen II; KLarsen@panix.com or KLarsen@NorthSouth.com (work). Pass the SPAM ban! Ask your Congressperson to support CAUCE http://www.cauce.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Keith Irwin Subject: Re: [LDSR] Orson Spencer -Reply Date: 17 Jun 1997 22:35:10 -0700 At 11:51 AM 6/17/97 -0500, Kent Larson wrote: >At 8:18 AM -0700 on 6/17/97, ROY SCHMIDT wrote: > >> Kip, >> >> Are the Spencer letters published? Where can they be accessed? >> >> Roy > >They were first published by Orson Spencer in England while he was Mission >President as tracts. > >Later, they were published in book form in both Utah and England for a >number of years. I believe they have been out of print since the 1890s Will Quist of Alpha Books has a copy of the 1879 edition for sale at around $30. Keith Keith Irwin Tanner-Irwin Consulting Group Internet:kirwin@hooked.net Phone: 408-268-6304 Fax 408-268-6389 "When someone comes to worship at your feet, be sure to count your toes afterwards." Gene Dalton ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: Re: [LDSR] Orson Spencer Date: 17 Jun 1997 14:35:41 -0500 At 7:59 PM -0600 on 6/16/97, wlbagley wrote: > Kent, > > I don't have anything on Spencer's early years, but I do have this. > Thanks, Will. I know I have the information from the History of the Church (with the Infobases CD-ROM, its pretty easy to find things like this (provided they don't make spelling errors!) I'm not sure about the rest of it, but given your resources, its probably new to me. Kent Kent S. "Kip" Larsen II; KLarsen@panix.com or KLarsen@NorthSouth.com (work). Pass the SPAM ban! Ask your Congressperson to support CAUCE http://www.cauce.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: vanetten.edward@corona.navy.mil (Vanetten.Edward) Subject: [LDSR] Etymology of EVE Date: 24 Jun 1997 07:22:22 -0700 How is it that the word _EVE_ came to be the English translation of the Hebrew word for the name of Adam's wife? How does the name _EVE_ have anything to do with the expression _mother of all living_? Ed Van Etten Ontario, California vanetten.edward@corona.navy.mil ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brian Tousley" Subject: [LDSR] Book of Abraham Defense Date: 24 Jun 1997 10:32:34 -0700 I am forwarding the following question from "Brian Tousley" . The question was posted to Mormon-Index@dont.panix.com. Brian Writes: "I am looking for a scholarly defense of the Book of Abraham as a product of Egyptian translating ability or divine revelation through Joseph Smith. Got any idea where I could look?" Aron S. Spencer responded: "Abraham in Egypt by Hugh Nibley" Can we of the "lds-research list" compile "Defense" and "Attack" lists for books written about the Book of Abraham? Scot owner-lds-research@xmission.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Kenison Subject: [LDSR] Baby Blessings (fwd) Date: 25 Jun 1997 10:13:44 -0600 (MDT) This question was asked by a member of the RLDS church. Anybody have an answer? When did the practice of blessing babies start? DaveK ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Greetings: I subscribed to "Gems" thinking it is a "List" where I may post a query to a crowd of "historians"... Anyway, my query would have been: "Who was the first baby blessed after the church was organized in 1830? When? Where? by whom?" Is this something your list subscribers might be of help to me? I am a research and records management assistant at the RLDS church headquarters in Independence,MO. I'm at a dead-end with this question. Thanks. Leon D. Berg ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Clark Goble Subject: RE: [LDSR] Book of Abraham Defense Date: 24 Jun 1997 16:13:17 -0600 ___ Brian ___ | "I am looking for a scholarly defense of the Book of Abraham as | a product of Egyptian translating ability or divine revelation | through Joseph Smith. Got any idea where I could look?" ___ There really isn't a good source at the moment. Hopefully that will change in the future. Brent Metcalf is preparing a book to attack the Book of Abraham. I'd expect FARMS to do something in a defense or the like. Nibley has several books and articles, but many of them are out of date or seriously flawed. The most popular ones - such as _Abraham in Egypt_ or _The Meaning of the Joseph Smith Papyri_ in effect are arguing beside the point. They point out a few broad typological parallels, but don't address the translation itself. Most of the defense of the Book of Abraham are more an attempt to argue against specific attacks. Thus there are arguments for missing text, alternative methods, or so forth. There are a few good arguments, but to be fair you then have to read the criticisms of those arguments. In some way the best discussions of the Book of Abraham have come on the net itself - especially on various mailing lists. >From a pro-Mormon perspective, the best source in the Infobase CD-Rom. It has a good collection of historical writings and also most of the articles written by John Gee in RBBM. Some of his points are a little off, but they are the best published defenses thus far. \\\ Clark Goble \\\\ cgoble@fiber.net \\\ Not matter how fast light travels it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it. -- Terry Pratchett _Reaper Man_ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Raymond Subject: Re: [LDSR] Book of Abraham Defense Date: 25 Jun 1997 12:52:57 -0600 Brian Tousley wrote: > I am forwarding the following question from "Brian Tousley" > . The question was posted to > Mormon-Index@dont.panix.com. > > Brian Writes: > "I am looking for a scholarly defense of the Book of Abraham as a > product of Egyptian translating ability or divine revelation through > Joseph > Smith. Got any idea where I could look?" > > Aron S. Spencer responded: > "Abraham in Egypt by Hugh Nibley" > > Can we of the "lds-research list" compile "Defense" and "Attack" lists > > for books written about the Book of Abraham? > > Scot > owner-lds-research@xmission.com Go to: http://mathnx.math.byu.edu/~jet/BOAP.html Jeff R. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kurt Neumiller" Subject: Re: [LDSR] Etymology of EVE Date: 26 Jun 1997 10:26:58 -0400 Everett Fox in his _The Five Books Of Moses_, the Schocken Edition, renders the passage in question as: The human called his wife's name Havva/Life-giver! For she became the mother of all the living. Thus, Fox would be interpreting the Hebrew "havva" to mean "life giver". The English "Eve" is a weak transliteration, Fox's transliteration to "havva" is better. On Jun 24, 7:22am, Vanetten.Edward wrote: > Subject: [LDSR] Etymology of EVE > How is it that the word _EVE_ came to be > the English translation of the Hebrew > word for the name of Adam's wife? > > How does the name _EVE_ have anything to do > with the expression _mother of all living_? -- Kurt Neumiller kurtn@crssa.rutgers.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-lds-research@xmission.com Subject: [LDSR] All about Eve Date: 26 Jun 1997 20:52:08 -0600 Owner-lds-research wrote: ___ Ed ___ | Kurt Neumiller gives us the Hebrew etymology. You seem to give | us the English derivation through Latin from the Hebrew. This | is very interesting. Can you attach a reference(s) to your | response? ___ The Hebrew etymology may be unrelated to the Latin. As I mentioned I don't know why the Latin word choice was used. I was just pointing out that the English was a transliteration (or actually adoption) of the Latin word. This should be noted in most dictionaries. I noticed it in Charlesworth in the translation of _The Life of Adam and Eve_. The name in the Latin was Evae. \\\ Clark Goble \\\\ cgoble@fiber.net \\\ Climbing is a joyous, instinctive activity; unless restrained, most children will scurry up trees, garden walls, building facades, and anything else steep and enticing. While society, in the form of parents, teachers and the law, discourages these activities, some determined individuals persist and eventually find their way back to the peaks. They follow the suggestion of one climber "to remember our arboreal ancestors, retreat intellecutually a couple of million years and make like monkeys, defying gravity with our own impetus." -- _Mountaineering: The Freedom of the Hills_ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richley Crapo To: lds-research@xmission.com Subject: [LDSR] Re.: Etymology of "Eve" Date: 25 Jun 1997 11:40:13 -0600 The Hebrew for Eve is Chaw-wa" or "Chavah". By folk etymology, this name is said to be related to the adjective "living", which is "chay" in Hebrew, or rather "chaya" or "chayah" rather than "chay". "Chayah" is the word in verse 20. It means "life". "Chay" is merely the adjective form meaning "living". By "folk etymology", I basically had in mind that the author of Genesis 3:20 claims that the two words are related: "And Adam called his wife's name Chawwa _because_ she was the mother of all "chaya" but the etymology is not accepted as a valid one by modern linguists. So, you are not likely to find it supported in a lexicon. However, your might check for a note in the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible. It may comment on the folk-nature of the verse's assertion. Richley Vanetten.Edward wrote on 6/24 8:22a... "How is it that the word _EVE_ came to be the English translation of the Hebrew word for the name of Adam's wife? How does the name _EVE_ have anything to do with the expression _mother of all living_?:" Ed Van Etten Ontario, California vanetten.edward@corona.navy.mil ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kurt Neumiller" Subject: Re: [LDSR] Etymology of Adam Date: 30 Jun 1997 14:28:36 -0400 On Jun 30, 11:03am, Alex-c Lopez wrote: > > Curious, I haven't access at present to my Etymology dictionary can you > share what the hebrew word for Adam is, and what meaning it has? Thank you 'adam {aw-dawm'} KJV - man 408, men 121, Adam 13, person(s) 8, common sort + 07230 1, hypocrite 1; 552 1) man, mankind 1a) man, human being 1b) man, mankind (much more frequently intended sense in OT) 1c) Adam, first man 1d) city in Jordan valley The Hebrew "'adam' simply means "man" as in a human. The transliteration of the Hebrew to the English Adam is just that, and not a translation at all. The below from Fox's translation is translating "'adam" to "human" where the KJV transliterates it to "Adam": Fox: The human called his wife's name Havva/Life-giver! For she became the mother of all the living. KJV: And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living -- Kurt Neumiller kurtn@crssa.rutgers.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Clark Goble Subject: [LDSR] Mormonism and Kabbalism Date: 26 Jun 1997 22:43:50 -0600 [Note from owner-lds-research@xmission.com] Although this post is neither a question nor a response to an earlier question, I thought I would approve it due to the interest some might find in the Lance Owens article of which Clark speaks. Having, myself, been a student of the Kabbalah for some years, I found Lance's article interesting enough to attend a course in the "Psychology of Carl Jung" which he taught at the University of Utah one quarter. As much as I enjoyed both the article and his classes, I believe Lance's argument is not compelling enough. His enthusiasm as a practicing Gnostic priest overpowers his analytical powers allowing him to see parallels and correspondences that either aren't there or that are misunderstood. I do not make this judgement as a Mormon apologist but rather as a student of esoteric traditions. There most certainly are significant parallels between Mormonism and various esoteric traditions such as Gnosticism and Kabbalah. Nevertheless before these can be understood in their correct context, scholars must first deal with such primary doctrinal conflicts as Mormon Materialism versus Gnostic and Kabbalistic Dualism as well as Mormon Pluralism versus what appears to be (depending on the school of thought) of a Gnostic and Kabbalistic Monism verging on Pantheism. After reading Lance's article, I strongly recommend that you read the review of his article in FARMS REVIEW OF BOOKS Vol. 8, Num. 2, 1996. Written by William J Hamblin, it is entitled. "Everything is Everything" Was Joseph Smith Influenced by Kabbalah?". [From Clark Goble] Lance Owens _Dialog_ article, "Joseph Smith and the Kabbalah: The Occult Connection" is available online now. The issue it came from is out of print so this may help people read it. The paper was the subject of a rather lengthy thread over on the now defunct Morm-Hist. The debate included Owens, William Hamblin, myself, and Joe Swick. The paper was attacked for several errors, and that should be taken into consideration when viewing the paper. However several of us, while recognizing many significant flaws, still thought the aspect of Kabbalistic parallels to be interesting. Several parallels to Joseph's Nauvoo theology and also Brigham Young's cosmology are present in the Kabbalah - although they frequently require a misreading of the Kabbalah to make them. The paper is part of the recent movement looking for parallels in Joseph's theology from "magic" or "occult" and esoteric movements. Kabbalism is an esoteric form of Judaic practice, ritual and theology. It is very mystical but several scholars consider it to contain throwbacks to ancient Judaism. The link is at: http://www.gnosis.org/jskabb1.htm \\\ Clark Goble \\\\ cgoble@fiber.net \\\ Climbing is a joyous, instinctive activity; unless restrained, most children will scurry up trees, garden walls, building facades, and anything else steep and enticing. While society, in the form of parents, teachers and the law, discourages these activities, some determined individuals persist and eventually find their way back to the peaks. They follow the suggestion of one climber "to remember our arboreal ancestors, retreat intellecutually a couple of million years and make like monkeys, defying gravity with our own impetus." -- _Mountaineering: The Freedom of the Hills_ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: AEParshall@aol.com Subject: Re: [LDSR] Baby Blessings (fwd) Date: 28 Jun 1997 01:18:17 -0400 (EDT) >This question was asked by a member of the RLDS church. Anybody have an >answer? When did the practice of blessing babies start? Unless someone has a definitive answer, maybe we could work together to come up with an "at least by this date" kind of answer (what's the Latin term for that?) My contribution: The LDS membership record books that were being used by the 1880s had a column to record blessings, as well as baptism and confirmation, rebaptism, and so on. So, baby blessings were well established at least by that date. The books used earlier than that did not have printed headings, and wards varied greatly in what information they recorded. (You can easily see examples of these books by checking the Family History Library catalog for any locality, under the heading for "Church Records".) Earlier evidence? Ardis Parshall AEParshall@aol.com