Replies

BTW, since I am distantly related to Bruce R McConkie, and since I know some of his children, I just might have an insight here, and yes, my mother has a first edition copy of his book and I have read it.

OK, if you're so familiar with the first generation account of MD, why is it you almost (purposely) keep sounding like a novice on the second generation account of MD? (What do I mean? See next section I've entitled, "The Mystery of McConkie's Missing 'Mormon Doctrine' Edition Deepens")

THE MYSTERY OF McCONKIE'S MISSING 'MORMON DOCTRINE' EDITION DEEPENS (scary organ music, please...get the popcorn out, MHG)

Me: That's precisely what the LDS Church did when McConkie wanted to republished "Mormon Doctrine" with the fixed errors pointed out to him by the First Presidency.

You: So you make my point that the church was upset at the errors, and it's not approved by the church. The church used strong language to encourage but did not have the power to compel.

Sorry, this doesn't pass the "straight face" test. Let's agree on the facts, shall we? (1) McConkie publishes book on his own, 1958, no review committee. (2) McKay assigns Marion Romney to review the book into 1959. (3) Romney reports on errors of the book. (4) McConkie understands these "errors." According to source I earlier cited: By early Jan of 1960, It is reported to us [First Presidency's office] that Brother McConkie has made corrections to his book, and is now preparing another edition. (5) Now according to you, who just said The church used strong language to encourage but did not have the power to compel, that would mean that McConkie's newly prepared...edition hit the bookshelves by 1961, right? (WRONG!!!) Well, why not? In 1959, McConkie made corrections to his book. In 1959, McConkie prepared another edition. Well, Sherlock, what happened to that edition? Did a black hole land in Salt Lake City in 1960 & kept it from being published? Hmm...(the mystery deepens...organ musics become even more eerie)

EXCEPT...EXCEPT...I already cited to you what happened!! Did you deliberately ignore it? Why do you pretend to be a novice on this second-generation edition? Let me re-quote it for you: The January 8, 1960 office notes of LDS "prophet" David O. McKay reflect that: We [the First Presidency of the Church] decided that Bruce R. McConkie’s book, ‘Mormon Doctrine’ recently published by Bookcraft Company, MUST NOT be re-published, as it is full of errors and misstatements, and it is most unfortunate that it has received such wide circulation. It is reported to us that Brother McConkie has made corrections to his book, and is now preparing another edition. WE DECIDED THIS MORNING THAT WE DO NOT WANT HIM TO PUBLISH ANOTHER EDITION."

Ah, the "whodunit" emerges, after all. Why, we now know the mystery of why there wasn't a revised "Mormon Doctrine" edition in late 1960 or into 1961: By deciding on that cold Jan. 8, 1960 morning that they didn't want him to publish another edition--saying in fact that it MUST NOT be re-published, guess what, DU? Surprise, surprise, the LDS First Presidency COMPELLED McConkie NOT to re-publish the book despite your persistent claims that The church used strong language to encourage but did not have the power to compel...However, the church cannot compel.

Now you want to explain why I just had to waste my time pointing out something so obvious to everybody else?

Did the Church leadership say to him "At least fix these things..." I am sure they did. Did they fix everything? No. Could they force him to, no. But would a good member, or GA disobey? Probably not. Does that make it condoned by the church, no.

Yeah, right. Here, McConkie, in 1959, "fixed" the errors presented to him by Marion Romney & other members of the LDS First Presidency. Did that get anywhere? (no) Think of it. If the track record is that if you do what Brother Dictator says and still Brother Dictator says, "Nope, this won't be republished in 1960 or 1961." What? You think when he tells you to fix the mistakes in 1966, that you're going to disobey a spiritual dictator who has the power to kill the book re-publishing project? (I don't think you're naive to believe that?)

I mean, you yourself, then turn around & quote McConkie as saying: "I am amenable to whatever you Brethren want. I will do exactly what you want." I think this is a good example of where listening to your lack of common sense is beginning to be a bit maddening here. One moment you claim, Did they fix everything? No. Could they force him to, no and not very many words later you quote McConkie himself as saying, "I am amenable to whatever you Brethren want. I will do exactly what you want."...I mean, here you yourself already have...

...Evidence of McConkie's 100% open-ended "amenable...I WILL DO EXACTLY WHATEVER YOU BRETHEN WANT" attitude...

...Evidence that even when McConkie did what his brothers wanted in 1959, they still censored his re-publishing efforts for 1960-61...

...Evidence that "Prophet" Lee directly told McConkie to fix the errors of the First edition for a '66 re-publishing (and you agree he probably didn't disobey Lee)...

...Evidence that Lee assign Kimball as a personal project mentor to oversee it and make sure the changes were made...

...And yet your conclusion? "Nope. Hear No Compel. See No Compel. Smell No Compel. Why, that Bruce R. McConkie, was sure his own man, wasn't he?" (Uh. FARMS/FAIR. When do I get my apologetic certificate? Did I pass? Did I protect the church enough by dumping it all on McConkie?)