Your perception of what is taught/spoken of in LDS church services RE: JS/JC

[scottie]

JS and JC aren't the only things taught at church but I'm interested in what you think of the related emphasis between the two (during the 3 hour block). This year Sunday School has covered the D&C and Church history, while Priesthood/Relief Society has been taught from the Teachings of Joseph Smith manual (for the second straight year if I recall correctly).

[smokymountainrain]

We just had our primary program two weeks ago - Joseph Smith's name wasn't mentioned once. It was all focused on Jesus.

Since the program, I decided to take note...we've had a sacrament meeting, two priesthood lessons and two sunday school classes. I would say it has been about 97% Jesus to 3% JS.

[creekster]

JS and JC aren't the only things taught at church but I'm interested in what you think of the related emphasis between the two (during the 3 hour block). This year Sunday School has covered the D&C and Church history, while Priesthood/Relief Society has been taught from the Teachings of Joseph Smith manual (for the second straight year if I recall correctly).

Most of the PH/RS manuals have been intended for a two year stretch. Moreover, they are teaching by JS, not just about him.

[scottie]

We just had our primary program two weeks ago - Joseph Smith's name wasn't mentioned once. It was all focused on Jesus.

Since the program, I decided to take note...we've had a sacrament meeting, two priesthood lessons and two sunday school classes. I would say it has been about 97% Jesus to 3% JS.

That's good. I'm curious to know what made you decide to take note.

[TripletDaddy]

I think we focus primarily on the Savior. We close all our prayers in His name. With the exception of "Praise to the Man" (a hymn I think we could do without, frankly...I don't even like the title), all our hymns are Savior-centric.

To your point, D&C 135 is also pretty effusive about Joseph Smith. I've never really understood the purpose of letting everyone know that Joseph has done more than any other person save Jesus Christ. Regardless of that fact, there is zero salvation in Joseph Smith the man. He has no saving power, he did not Atone for our sins. We do not pray to him nor worship him. But verses like that sometimes can be confusing because they are, in essence, ranking the importance of people, when in reality, there is The Savior and then there is everyone else. Joseph definitely accomplished mighty miracles during his tenure, but an entire section of scripture devoted to making a list of his accomplishments? Seems weird.

I enjoy speaking of Joseph, just as we speak of other prophets. But lesson after lesson on Joseph Smith can leave me cold. I really appreciate when talks only use Joseph as context for the more important Christ-centric messages. Fortunately, I feel that we do a really good job at keeping Him at the center of all that we do.

[creekster]

While I don't think the doctrine has ever shifted, I do think the emphasis has changed. remember that the early pioneers were people who had given up EVERYTHING to follow the gospel as described by JS. They had to revere him. IMO their devotion to him was an act of self affirmation. It justified what they had done, it acknowledged the importance of the work, and it told them it was all worth it. 30-40 years ago when I was a kid in Utah, there was more of an emphasis on JS, IMO. As the Church has diversified this emphasis has diminished.

Isn't Joseph Smith's first prayer (Oh how lovely was the morning?) also about JS?

[Moliere]

This thread reminds me of a sacrament meeting a couple years ago. A large investigator family came in and sat on about the 4th row in the chapel. Sadly the theme of the sacrament meeting was Joseph Smith. All the talks were about him. We even sang "Praise to the Man" as the intermediate hymn and the chorister has us stand up during the song.

I can only imagine what that family was thinking during the whole thing. They probably went back to their old church and began to tell people that we really do worship JS, because from that sacrament meeting it really felt like we did.

[Pheidippides]

This is something I have been increasingly vocal about in meetings. Based on what I see, I am worried that (1) we do not focus enough on Christ, whatever font size we may use for His name in our official logo, and (2) there is a tendency to have a cult of personality surrounding our leaders and especially Joseph Smith (and whitewashing ensues).

To be very clear, I am NOT saying this happens all the time, in all places, or with all people. I am saying that I am concerned about these things and I have determined to both raise the issue and not be guilty of them myself on an individual level. To also be clear, these are not things I say in open forum in SS/EQ, but rather in places like Bishopric and Ward Council (in fact, my ability to do so is really the only reason that I do not ask to be released and given a calling in Primary).

I am very glad that the RS/EQ manuals for next year are the new Gospel Principles manuals. I think we often focus way, way to much on the minutiae of whether or not chocolate has caffeine in it, at the expense of important things, like the Atonement or Charity.

[SCcoug]

My experience has been that vast majority of lessons, talks, and hymns focus on Christ. The one exception was the 2005 Christmas season, which was the 200th anniversary of the birth of JS, that turned into the smithmas season with lots of talks on JS.

[Sleeping in EQ]

The double dose of JS in Sunday School and Priesthood/RS is a little much.

On the other hand, some of JS's more open minded statements actually made it into the manual. That has been refreshing, except when a mullah teacher does his best to "edge it out" or just ignores it.

[Sleeping in EQ]

My experience has been that vast majority of lessons, talks, and hymns focus on Christ. The one exception was the 2005 Christmas season, which was the 200th anniversary of the birth of JS, that turned into the smithmas season with lots of talks on JS.

I remember that Smithmas. That was a high-water mark in the rehabilitation of Emma's reputation. I was wondering how long it would be before the Lion House was renamed the "Joseph and Emma Monogomy Center."

[LiveCoug]

My experience is 95% Christ. I've never even pondered the question of whether we talk about JS more than JC. That's just weird to me.

[DU Ute]

My experience is 95% Christ. I've never even pondered the question of whether we talk about JS more than JC. That's just weird to me.

I agree. It gets me wondering about what the wards some of you attend are like.

[TripletDaddy]

While I don't think the doctrine has ever shifted, I do think the emphasis has changed. remember that the early pioneers were people who had given up EVERYTHING to follow the gospel as described by JS. They had to revere him. IMO their devotion to him was an act of self affirmation. It justified what they had done, it acknowledged the importance of the work, and it told them it was all worth it. 30-40 years ago when I was a kid in Utah, there was more of an emphasis on JS, IMO. As the Church has diversified this emphasis has diminished.

Isn't Joseph Smith's first prayer (Oh how lovely was the morning?) also about JS?

Yes, good catch. I should have explained.

I view the lyrics and tone of JSFP as an interpretive historical piece. It is basically outlining a sequence of critical events that played an important role in the Church's early history.

The lyrics are laden with prose, but the core message is that Joseph wondered, he pondered, he prayed, and received an answer to his prayer.

While I love singing "Praise to the Man" (aka Scotland the Brave!), the lyrics have always struck me as borderline worshipful:

"Kings shall extol him and nations revere." While that may be true (I'm not sure it is), it seems to go completely against Christ's decision to give glory to the Father.

"Hail to the Prophet" and "Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his Brethren".....again, we don't Hail to any man. We respect the prophet, yes. We do not worship him. Also, what are these plans Joseph is undertaking right now while mingling with Gods? Again, Jesus acquiesced to the Lord's plan. I think it is weird to sing about Joseph making his own plans up in Heaven.

The lyrics get a little more blatant in the next verse:

"Long shall his blood, which was shed by assasins, Plead unto heaven while the earth lauds his fame."

The final verse is nothing short of bizarre, frankly.

Earth must atone for the blood of that man.
Wake up the world for the conflict of justice.
Millions shall know "Brother Joseph" again.

First, this is doctrinally incorrect. There is only one Atonement. It is an incredibly poor chose of words to claim that there will be another atonement, specifically on behalf of Joseph Smith.

Finally, I have always wondered about the meaning of the final phrase...millions shall know "Brother Joseph" again. One, why is his name in quotes? Second, it has always struck me as a threat....sort of an "oh yeah?....ok, you'll be sorry...." sort of thing.

Anyway, I'm not offended by this hymn, I just think it sends a confusing message that goes along with scotty's inquiry. As mentioned before, if I had an investigator at Church, I would NOT want to sing "Praise to the Man."

[mUUser]

I think we focus primarily on the Savior. We close all our prayers in His name. With the exception of "Praise to the Man" (a hymn I think we could do without, frankly...I don't even like the title), all our hymns are Savior-centric.

To your point, D&C 135 is also pretty effusive about Joseph Smith. I've never really understood the purpose of letting everyone know that Joseph has done more than any other person save Jesus Christ. Regardless of that fact, there is zero salvation in Joseph Smith the man. He has no saving power, he did not Atone for our sins. We do not pray to him nor worship him. But verses like that sometimes can be confusing because they are, in essence, ranking the importance of people, when in reality, there is The Savior and then there is everyone else. Joseph definitely accomplished mighty miracles during his tenure, but an entire section of scripture devoted to making a list of his accomplishments? Seems weird.

I enjoy speaking of Joseph, just as we speak of other prophets. But lesson after lesson on Joseph Smith can leave me cold. I really appreciate when talks only use Joseph as context for the more important Christ-centric messages. Fortunately, I feel that we do a really good job at keeping Him at the center of all that we do.

Generally concur with this post. The Savior is everything, and references to JS and other prophets insofar as it doesn't sustain a teaching of Christ is tracking off the mark. Abt 4 weeks ago we had a PHood lesson that consisted entirely of quotes from individuals that knew, loved and/or sustained JS. What was the point of that lesson?