Although I disagree with Church doctrine, I have to admit that I have respect for Bruce R McConkie. He was not only loved by members of the church, he seemed to be well-respected outside the Church as well. I remember reading a few articles regarding religious scholars who were very impressed with his incredible (even intimidating) understanding of the Bible.

I turned to Mormon Doctrine several times on my mission (although it was contraband) and used his books and quotes quite a bit as well when I was TBM. It seemed like he could answer any question related to the scriptures.

McConkie was the last apostle who was also a religious scholar. What happened? Now every apostle is just a businessman rehashing out the same-old garbage over and over again. They have no religious training or background. It seems like none of them add anything useful anymore to Mormon beliefs.

In fact, it seems like reading anything from McConkie is now frowned upon by the current 15... perhaps it is too complicated for them to understand? Now all the dirty-work is done by FAIR or Maxwell House-- so the apostles can focus on making money instead of answering questions from their followers.

Does anyone else feel the same way?

I have studied and studied McConkie's works -- allo of them for years. He is no more a scholar than Cleon Skousen. Both were arrogant and too sure of their pet theories, believing that their opinions were superior to all others.

McConkie copied, plagiarized, borrowed (without attribution) huge chunks of old and dated biblical commentaries. He did not understand a word of original NT and OT language and relied on commentaries, encyclopedias, dictionaries and lexicons written in the early 1900s; before newer and more reliable biblical studies appeared.

He was convinced that the King James Version of the Bible was superior to later (and unquestionably superior) translations. None but the uninformed agree with McConkie.

He copied Talmages ideas about many Christological issues In his Mortal Messiah series. He tended to ramble on and on in a self exalted way about his embellishments of those he merely copied.

If Bruce R was a biblical or a religious scholar I am a world class musician (think: ken is a amateurish hack on the piano).

Good to know, thank you for the information-- I was not aware of many of those issues you brought up (I learn something new everyday on this site!)

In my TBM days I always viewed him as kind of a bad ass. It seemed like he would take on any subject and explain it clearly. I rarely felt the need to dig further into a subject I was hazy on once I read what he said about it.

Now a days the big 15 are all about ambiguity. I'm still flabbergasted at Marlin K J's answers to the swedes. They pu$syfoot around the simplest of issues like idiots, not realizing they are just digging deeper holes for themselves.

Edit: Of course they're all full of $hit, but it was nice to get actual answers to some of the tough questions.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2013 09:01PM by Frightened Inmate #2.

At Ricks college back in 75/75 It was a big deal to have a GA talk at the Tuesday devotionals.

When Bruce came to town there was a line to get into the gym/auditorium to listen to him.

I was a new starry eyed convert. I looked around and saw girls sitting there with their knitting and crochet projects and tried not to think badly of them for knitting while listening to an Apostle.

As the opening hymn ended, Bruce was introduced and he started to talk. I'd already read all of his material. I wasn't that wet behind the ears, I'd been a member for over a year and read everything I could on the church.

But the people started to drop off like flys!

They nodded in their seats, they slumped down and fell asleep!
It was incredible! I looked around, I could count at least 15 to 25 people in my immediate area. Then I looked at the clock..... Bruce R. McConkie had been talking for less than 12 minutes!!!!!

I wondered if it was some sort of record. The only way I stayed awake was by taking out my book bag, grabbing a notebook and start taking notes. He droned and droned and droned for over 45 minutes!!!!!!

He could repeat everything you ever knew about Mormon doctrine and theology for hours and hours and you wouldn't hear anything new or refreshing! Or even a new story or two thrown in for boredom relief.

When it was over, the only people awake were me and the knitters! (kidding a little bit)

Read Eugene England's story, "A Professor and Apostle Correspond: Eugene England and Bruce R. McConkie on the Nature of God."

After the read, your respect for Mr. McC will change.

http://www.eugeneengland.org/a-professor-and-apostle-correspond-eugene-england-and-bruce-r-mcconkie-on-the-nature-of-god

Wow, thank you for the link.. you're right

While physically he was quite imposing, intellectually he was a pedantic ass. He had taught that we pray to god and have a personal relationship with him. When George Pace, a very popular religion teacher taught and wrote that we can have a personal relationship with jeebuz, ole Bruce publicly humiliated him at a BYU assembly. George's book fell off the shelves and he just sucked it up. Now Pace was his own particular kind of wacko, but he took his medicine and deferred to the "apostle".

I had the particularly noxious task of meeting with McConkie as a missionary. He spoke to the assembled missionaries in a mission conference and it took him about three minutes to go from nice guy to confronting and chastising the missionaries one-by-one. One particularly little toady (he was the one that suggested we have locusts and honey for the president's farewell party....he was serious...now he's a BYU religion prof) tried to answer the question "who does the lord love most the pope or the prophet?" with the idea that god loves all his children equally. He was promptly handed his hat...with his head still in it. He was told that he was wrong and was told to sit down. Poor Elder Underwood....I think he probably shat himself as he realized his dreams of being a GA had just disappeared.

I was sitting in the back translating for the Spanish speaking missionaries. I edited out all the confrontation but his affect was so mean and nasty that it was impossible to hide. He calmed down by the time we ate and had the table manners of a field hand.

Ole Bruce insisted that NO ONE... I REPEAT NO ONE...NO EXCEPTIONS could have a testimony without reading the BoM. In my meeting I told him my personal experience was different and he promptly indicated that of course there were exceptions.

I my experience he was an ass and an intellectual fraud...

Wow, I didn't realize he was such an @sshole

satanslittlehelper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He was told that he was wrong and was told to sit down.
> Poor Elder Underwood....I think he probably shat
> himself as he realized his dreams of being a GA
> had just disappeared.

Seems that this "you are wrong; sit down" arrogance was part of
Big Bad Brucie's standard bag of tricks--

"He [McConkie] and I were both in our early thirties when we
had had an encounter several years earlier in a church meeting
in the Los Angeles Stake. He was a newly appointed member of
the First Council of Seventy, and I blasted him in the meeting
for insulting those who could not answer his questions the way
he wanted. He would call out a name, have the man stand, ask
him a question, then say, "You're wrong. You sit down." If the
victim protested at all, he'd say, "I told you to sit down!"
His behavior was disgraceful, and I couldn't sit still for any
more of it. I interrupted the meeting to tell him we were not
going to tolerate any more of this humiliation."

--Stirling M. McMurrin, quoted in, "Matters of Conscience:
Conversations with Sterling M. McMurrin on Philosophy,
Education, and Religion," pp 183-84

McMurrin told the story in context of a meeting of Mormon
intellectuals (the so-called "swearing elders") at the
University of Utah. The subject for discussion was evolution
and McConkie decided to show up and set them all straight.
After everyone had spoken, McConkie got up and just told them
they had to be wrong because Church doctrine said so. As he
droned on a janitor told McMurrin, who was running the meeting,
that he had to lock up the building. McMurrin asked for, and
got, another 10 minutes. He told McConkie that he had 2
minutes more (others were waiting to speak) and McConkie kept
talking beyond his two minutes. McMurrin related:

"So I said, 'Any further comments must be limited to two
minutes.' Well, McConkie was on his feet and he kept talking.
When his time was up, I pointed to my watch. He kept talking,
so I stood up. He said, 'Now just a minute, Sterling...' I shot
back, 'Now, you wait a minute, Bruce, your time is up, so you
sit down.' He did sit down, too. I don't often talk like that,
of course, but I'd been waiting for years to tell McConkie to
sit down!"

--ibid p 184

Today's church leaders have to deal with their comments being instantly available to everybody. You don't need to listen to conference, or buy their books, or go to a Christian bookstore to hear and challenge/critique their words. A McConkie today would be embarrassed, challenged, or censored quickly, (see Mr. Packer, for example.)

It is hard, for me, to respect the man. He stole many of his ideas not just from Christians and historians but also from his father in law, the Joe Smith who wrote Doctrines of Salvation.

A lot of what he wrote was insane. For example, evolution could not possibly be true because Adam brought death into the world. Anyone who believes in evolution is not really a Mormon. He also wrote the definitive account of why blacks couldn't have the priesthood. "Oops. Well, we can always remove that from the next edition." Then there was the blood of Israel. He wrote that if someone who is not of the lineage of Israel and is baptized, his blood literally changes to that of an Isrealite. Yes, baptism changes the structure of one's blood.

You can say that Bruce had the guts to go out on a limb, which is true, but he really hurt the church. McKay and the mainstream thought a lot of those doctrinal points were either wrong or ambiguous. They wanted members to have more freedom to interpret things themselvs. But the truth is that people like answers and certainty, so he basically defined what the church believes. For that he gained rockstar status and perhaps some money. But much of what the church is running from today is stuff that he enshrined.

On a different issue, the other day I was cleaning out my storage shed and found a bunch of old LDS books, including Mormon Doctrine and Doctrines of Salvation. I'm ecstatic. I thought I'd thrown those things away. Now I have them in all their insanity, complete with my marginalia, from back when the church had doctrine and taught it. I know of one little library that the church won't be able to destroy!

There are solid examples that, in my view, bear out the accuracy of that assessment, with a notable one being the issue of the credibility of McConkie's book, "Mormon Doctrine."

In another, bygone thread, RfM poster "Queen of Denial" asked:

"When did McConkie's 'Mormon Doctrine' fall from grace?"

("When did McConkie's 'Mormon Doctrine' fall from grace? (n/t)," posted by "Queen of Denial," on "Recovery from Mormonism" bulletin board, 18 May 2011, 12:13 p.m.)

The death spiral of McConkie's bizarre book began shortly after it was first published, despite his unmistakable and misleading implication to me that it represented official Mormon Church doctrine.


**A Personal Meeting with Bruce R. McConkie—In Which He Blatantly Lied to Me

When I was a student at Brigham Young University in the 1970s, I decided to do a research paper on the official LDS position on organic evolution. Much of my effort to write an accurate account on the subject involved repeated, and often frustrating, attempts to solicit answers from the Mormon Church hierachy.

During my research, I personally met and spoke with Apostle Bruce R. McConkie.

An account of that meeting follows below, taken from personal notes I made of our discussion, which took place at McConkie's private residence, 260 Dorchester Drive, in Salt Lake City, Utah, on Monday, 7 July 1980, from 5:45 to 7:30 p.m.


*Ezra Taft Benson Arranges the Meeting

On the day of my conversation with McConkie, I had visited earlier, for approximately three-and-a-half hours, with my grandfather, Ezra Taft Benson, then-president of the Council of the Twelve, in his Salt Lake City apartment, located in the Bonneville Towers, 777 East South Temple.

During that discussion, my grandfather suggested that it might be good for me to speak directly with McConkie on this matter.

Still a true-believing Mormon at the time, I replied that I would consider it to be a great honor to meet a man whom I considered to be one of the greatest living scriptorians in the Church.

I added, however, that I did not want to be an imposition. My grandfather assured me that McConkie would be happy to speak with me, assuming that an appropriate time and place could be arranged.

I told my grandfather I would be available to meet with him anytime, anywhere, and would only want to take a few minutes of his time to clarify in my own mind some of the important questions that seemed (at least to me) to be in need of definitive answers regarding the official position of the Mormon Church on the theory of organic evolution.

At this point (approximately 3:45 p.m.), as I looked on, my grandfather went over to the phone and made a personal call to McConkie, who was still in his Church office.

After chatting with McConkie for a few minutes, my grandfather hung up and informed me that the meeting had been arranged for 5:30 that same afternoon, at McConkie's home.

Once the initial excitement had subsided somewhat, I expressed concern to my grandfather that, in the upcoming question-and-answer session with McConkie, I did not want to appear to be lacking faith and testimony in McConkie's divine calling and apostleship.

In particular, I was somewhat anxious that my inquiries, although sincere, might be misinterpreted and prove offensive to McConkie, who was known for his forthright, umcompromising views--which views appeared to some to reflect a certain degree of sternness and even harshness, when "laying down the line" in areas of Mormon Church doctrine.

My grandfather reassured me that McConkie was "a very gracious man," with sons my own age (I was a 26-year-old BYU student at the time). He encouraged me to be as frank with McConkie in my questioning as I had been with him.


*Close Encounters of the Bruce Kind

By coincidence, I had already planned to meet my father in downtown Salt Lake City after my visit with my grandfather and be driven to my parents' residence, where I was staying during summer vacation.

When I slid into the front seat of my father's car at 5:15 that afternoon and informed him of the scheduled meeting with McConkie in 15 minutes, he was pleasantly surprised. He offered to take me to McConkie's home, which I hoped he would do, since I had no other means of getting there in the few minutes remaining before the scheduled appointment.

As we drove to McConkie's home, I told my father that while I was certainly not adverse to having him sit in on my conversation with McConkie, I regarded the visit as a unique one-on-one opportunity to ask McConkie whatever questions I felt were necessary to provide a clearer understanding of Mormon doctrinal matters.

My father said he understood and offered to drop me off at McConkie's home, then return to pick me up after our visit was concluded. I did not feel that was necessary and suggested that we "play it by ear."

If McConkie invited both of us into his home, as I expected he would, I felt I would not be inhibited, as long as my father honored my request to be able to interact freely with McConkie, without interruption--no matter how well-intentioned that interruption might be.

McConkie greeted us warmly at the door, presenting an image quite different from the Bruce the Concrete-Hearted that I, and millions of others, had come to expect from his stiff-as-a-board-for-the-Lord Conference talks.

He was dressed in an open-necked yellow sports shirt, slacks and house slippers. (And all this time I thought he had been born in a dark blue suit).

He turned to me, grinned and asked if there was anything I did not want my father to hear during our conversation.

I said no, whereupon McConkie ushered us into his comfortable, sun-lit living room. My father and I sat on a sofa, approximately ten feet across from McConkie, who seated himself in a chair next to a lampstand on which rested his scriptures and some other papers.

His demeanor was relaxed and served to help put me at ease. The atmosphere throughout our conversation was open and friendly. McConkie encouraged me, on more than one occasion during our discussion, not to hesitate in asking whatever I wanted.

In keeping with my previous request, my father sat and listened silently.


*McConkie Manipulates and Misleads on His "Mormon Doctrine"

During our discussion, which focused primarily on the subject of the Mormon Church’s official position on organic evolution, attention turned briefly to the Roman Catholic Church.

McConkie had asserted to me that while the Mormon Church, institutionally and as a matter of official doctrine, opposed organic evolution, the Church was not going to say so because McConkie, told me, it did not want to pick fights with its vulnerable members.

He explained, "It's a matter of temporizing, of not making a statement to prevent the driving out of the weak Saints. It's a question of wisdom, not of truth."

He compared it to calling the Catholic Church "the Church of the Devil." He said while such a statement was true, one had to be careful about saying it, so as not to offend Catholics.

I asked McConkie why, in fact, his reference to the Roman Catholic Church as the "Church of the Devil" had been removed from the 2nd edition of his book, "Mormon Doctrine."

McConkie insisted to me that it was excised not because it was not doctrinally sound but because it was too difficult for people to accept.

In essence, McConkie’s explanation for his original reference (as it appeared in the 1958 first edition of Mormon Doctrine) to the Roman Catholic Church as the "Church of the Devil" being expunged from in its subsequent 1966 re-publication was, he said, a matter of good manners and sensitivity--and had nothing to do with the theological truth of his claim.

At that point in my travels through Mormonism's maze of muck, I didn't know any better but to accept what McConkie told me as being factual.

The trouble was, McConkie’s smiling assertion turned out to be a bald-face lie.

It has been exposed as such by the emergence of documents which were generated at the highest levels of the Mormon Church during the swirl of controversy that erupted when Mormon Doctrine was first published.
_____


--McConkie’s "Mormon Doctrine" Was Never Accepted By the LDS Church President As Official Mormon Dogma

Faithful Mormons often cite McConkie’s "Mormon Doctrine" as an authoritative volume on official LDS doctrine.

However, its initial publication was not only unauthorized, but met by then-President David O. McKay and other General Authorities with both surprise and objection.

In the wake of its unapproved appearance, McKay directed that a review be made of the book’s contents and a report submitted to him, along with recommendations on how to deal with it problematic publication.
_____


--A Confidential, Top-Level Analysis of McConkie's "Mormon Doctrine" Concluded That It Was Full of Misinformation, Insults and Unauthoritative Claims

An analysis of McConkie’s book was subsequently conducted by Apostles Marion G. Romney and Mark E. Petersen, wherein they noted the book’s numerous doctrinal errors, objectionable language, discourteous tone and questionable claims.

Recommendation was made that McConkie’s "Mormon Doctrine" not be republished, that it be repudiated and that in the future no book be published by any of the Brethren without first obtaining First Presidency approval.

McKay agreed with the suggestion that "Mormon Doctrine" not be republished and directed that restrictions be placed on future independent book publishing by the General Authorities.

The First Presidency also issued a private, face-to-face reprimand to McConkie, whereupon McConkie promised to behave.

Below are documents which include McKay’s officially-directed report on the book’s contents (authored by Apostle Romney), as well as excerpts from McKay’s contemporary office journal on the controversy surrounding the book and the resolution of the problems its publication had created for McKay and the Church.

(These documents were originally copied with permission of the LDS Church Archivist. The original Romney letter and its attached copy of the Mormon Doctrine manuscript are in the First Presidency’s Office. Reproductions of those copies are in my possession and—as are so many other damning evidences against the Mormon Church—now available on the Internet):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bruce_R._McConkie


Also cited below are letters authorized by McKay which were sent out to inquiring Church members after publication of McConkie's "Mormon Doctrine," declaring that it and other books published by individual General Authorities did not represent the official position of the LDS Church.

(Copies of these letters are also in my possession, as well as available via the so-called "Mormon underground").

_____


--Report from Marion G. Romney to David O. McKay

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
The Council of the Twelve
47 E. South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah

"January 28, 1959 . . .


"Dear President McKay:

"This is my report on MORMON DOCTRINE, by Bruce R. McConkie, which on January 5, you asked me to read.

"The book is a 776 page work which, in the words of the author, purports to be, ‘the first major attempt to digest, explain, and analyze all of the important doctrines of the kingdom . . . . . the first extensive compendium of the whole gospel—the first attempt to publish an encyclopedic commentary covering the whole field of revealed religion.’

"‘For the work itself,’ the author assumes the ‘sole and full responsibility.’ (Exhibit I) (The exhibits cited in this report consist of printed pages from the book. The statements in point are underscored in red.)

"Preparation of the volume has entailed much study and research. Its favorable reception evidences a felt need for such a treatise.

"The author is an able and thorough student of the gospel. In many respects he has produced a remarkable book. Properly used, it quickly introduces the student to the authorities on most any gospel subject.

"As to the book itself, notwithstanding its many commendable and valuable features and the author’s assumption of ‘sole and full responsibility’ for it, its nature and scope and the authoritative tone of the style in which it is written pose the question as to the propriety of the author’s attempting such a project without assignment and supervision from him whose right and responsibility it is to speak for the Church on ‘Mormon Doctrine.’ Had the work been authoritatively supervised, some of the following matters might have been omitted and the treatment of others modified. [emphasis added]

"A. Reference to churches and other groups who do not accept ‘Mormon Doctrine’.

"1. ‘Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,’ who sometimes refer to themselves as ‘Josephites’. (Exhibit II-1, pages 50, 141, 362)

"2. ‘Christian Churches’ generally. (Exhibit II-2, pages 139, 455)

"3. ‘Catholic Church’. (Exhibit II-3, pages 13, 66, 69, 129, 130, 216, 241, 314-15, 342, 346, 350, 422, 499, 511, 697) [emphasis added]

"4. Communists and Catholics. (Exhibit II-4, pages 26-7, 131) [emphasis added]

"5. Evolution and Evolutionists. (Exhibit II-5, pages 37, 77, 136, 180, 228, 238, 659)


"B. Declaration as to ‘Mormon Doctrine’ on controversial issues.

"1. ‘Pre-Adamites’. (Exhibit III-1, pages 17, 262)

"2. Status of Animals and Plants in the Garden of Eden. (Exhibit III-2, pages 36, 234-35)

"3. Meaning of the various accounts of Creation. (exhibit III_3, pages 157-8, 167-8)

4. Dispensation of Abraham. (Exhibit III-4, page 203)

"5. Moses a translated being. (Exhibit III_5, pages 206, 445, 466, 727-8)

"6. Origin of Individuality. (Exhibit III-6, page 404)

"7. Defiling the priesthood. (Exhibit III-7, page 437)

"8. Manner in which Jesus was Begotten. (Exhibit III-8, page 494)

"9. Written sermons. (Exhibit III-9, pages 634-5, 716)

"10. Resurrection of stillborn children. (Exhibit III-10, page 694)


"C. Miscellaneous Interpretations (Exhibit IV)

"Frequency of Administrations, page 22

"Baptism in the ‘molten sea,’ page 98

"II Peter 1:19, page 102

"Paul married, page 112

"Status of those ‘with Christ in His Resurrection', page 128

"Consecration of oil, page 147

"Councils and schools among the Gods, page 151

"Limitations on Deity, page 154

"Sunday not a proper day for family reunions, page 254

"Geological changes at time of the deluge, page 268

"The Holy Ghost a spirit man, page 329

"Facing east in temples when giving the Hosanna Shout, page 337

"Details on family prayer and asking the blessing on food, page 526

"Women to be gods, page 551

"Interpretations of the Doctrine and Covenants 93:1, page 581

"Interpretation of "Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning," page 606

"Status of little children in the celestial kingdom, page 607

"Resumption of schools of the prophets, page 613

"Time of beginning of seasons, page 616

"Interpretation of III Nephi 12:20, page 618


"D. Repeated use of the word ‘apostate’ and related terms in a way which to many seems discourteous and to others gives offense. (Exhibit V, pages 123, 125, 160, 169, 212, 223, 383, 538, 546, 548, 596)

"Faithfully and Respectfully submitted,

[Signed]

"Marion G. Romney

"Enc.

"P. S.

"As per my letter to you of January 9, I have promised to contact Marvin Wallin, manager of Bookcraft Company, by the 9th of February about the 4,000 volume edition of MORMON DOCTRINE which he is holding.

"I shall therefore seek to contact you about the matter near the end of next week.

"Sincerely,

"M. G. R."
_____


--Office Journal of President David O. McKay

"THURSDAY, January 7, 1960

"10:15 to 12:45 p.m. Re: The book—‘Mormon Doctrine’

"The First Presidency met with Elders Mark E. Petersen and Marion G. Romney. They submitted their report upon their examination of the book ‘Mormon Doctrine’ by Elder Bruce McConkie.

"These brethren reported that the manuscript of the book ‘Mormon Doctrine’ has not been read by the reading committee; that President Joseph Fielding Smith did not know anything about it until it was published. Elder Petersen stated that the extent of the corrections which he had marked in his copy of the book (1067) affected most of the 776 pages of the book. He also said that he thought the brethren should be under the rule that no book should be published without a specific approval of the First Presidency.

"I stated that the decision of the First Presidency and the Committee should be announced to the Twelve.

"It was agreed that the necessary corrections are so numerous that to republish a corrected edition of the book would be such an extensive repudiation of the original as to destroy the credit of the author; that the republication of the book should be forbidden and that the book should be repudiated in such a way as to save the career of the author as one of the General Authorities of the Church. It was also agreed that this decision should be announced to the Council of the Twelve before I talk to the author.

"Elder Petersen will prepare an editorial for publication in the Improvement Era, stating the principle of approval of books on Church doctrine."


"FRIDAY, January 8, 1960

"11:55 to 12:15 p.m.

"The First Presidency held a meeting. We 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.

"We decided, also, to have no more books published by General Authorities without their first having the consent of the First Presidency. (see January 7, 1960)"


"WEDNESDAY, January 27, 1960

"3:00 P. M. Conference with Pres. Joseph Fielding Smith re: Bruce R. McConkie’s book, ‘Mormon Doctrine’

"At the request of the First Presidency, I called President Joseph Fielding Smith and told him that we are a unit in disapproving of Brother Bruce R. McConkie’s book, ‘Mormon Doctrine,’ as an authoritative exposition of the principles of the gospel.

"I then said: ‘Now, Brother Smith, he is a General Authority, and we do not want to give him a public rebuke that would be embarrassing to him and lessen his influence with the members of the Church, so we shall speak to the Twelve at our meeting in the Temple tomorrow, and tell them that Brother McConkie’s book is not approved as an authoritative book and that it should not be republished, even if the errors (some 1,067) are corrected.’

"Brother Smith agreed with this suggestion to report to the Twelve, and said, ‘That is the best thing to do.

"I then said that Brother McConkie is advocating by letter some of the [one line of words partially cut off on bottom of the photocopied page of journal] . . . to letters he receives. Brother Smith said, ‘I will speak to him about that.’ I then mentioned that he is also speaking on these subjects, and Brother Smith said, ‘I will speak to him about that also.’

"I also said that the First Presidency had decided that General Authorities of the Church should not publish books without submitting them to some member of the General Authorities, and President Smith agreed to this as being wise."


"THURSDAY, January 28, 1960

"8:30 to 9 a.m. Bruce R. McConkie’s Book

"Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency. I reported to my counselors that I had talked with President Joseph Fielding Smith about the decision that the book ‘Mormon Doctrine’ should not be republished and about handling the matter to avoid undermining Brother McConkie’s influence. President Smith agreed that the book should not be republished, and said he would talk with Brother McConkie. It was decided that the First Presidency should inform Brother McConkie before he learns of our decision from some other source, so Brother McConkie was asked to come into our meeting this morning.

"When he arrived I informed him of the desire of the First Presidency with reference to h is book not being republished, to which he agreed. The recommendation was also made that he answer inquiries on the subject with care. Brother McConkie said, ‘I am amenable to whatever you Brethren want. I will do exactly what you want. I will be as discreet and as wise as I can.’ In answering letters he said that he would express no views contrary to views which the First Presidency has expressed. He said that he would conform in every respect. . . .

"10 a.m. to 2:45 p.m.

"Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve in the Salt Lake Temple.

"At Council meeting I reported to the Brethren our decision regarding Elder Bruce R. McConkie’s book ‘Mormon Doctrine,’ stating that it had caused considerable comment throughout the Church, and that it has been a source of concern to the Brethren ever since it was published. I said that this book had not been presented to anyone for consideration or approval until after its publication. I further said that the First Presidency have [sic] give it very careful consideration, as undoubtedly have some of the Brethren of the Twelve also, and that the First Presidency now recommend that the book be not republished; that it be not republished even in a corrected form, even though Brother McConkie mentions in the book that he takes all responsibility for it; and that it not be recognized as an authoritative book.

"I said further that the question has arisen as to whether a public correction should be made and a addendum given emphasizing the [bottom line of photocopied page of journal cut off] . . . it is felt that that would not be wise because Brother McConkie is one of the General Authorities, and it might lessen his influence. The First Presidency recommend that the situation be left as it is, and whenever a question about it arises, we can answer that it is unauthoritative; that it was issued by Brother McConkie on his own responsibility, and he must answer for it.

"I reported that the First Presidency had talked to Brother McConkie this morning, and he said he will do whatever the Brethren want him to do. He will not attempt to republish the book nor to say anything by letter, and if he answers letters or inquiries that he will answer them in accordance with the suggestions made by the Brethren, and not advocate those things concerning which question had been raised as contained in the book.

"The Brethren unanimously approved of this.

"I then said that the First Presidency further recommend that when any member of the General Authorities desires to write a book, that the Brethren of the Twelve or the First Presidency be consulted regarding it. While the author need not get the approval of these Brethren, they should know before it is published that a member of the General Authorities wants to publish a book. I said it may seem all right for the writer of the book to say, ‘I only am responsible for it,’ but I said ‘you cannot separate your position from your individuality, and we should like the authors to present their books to the Twelve or a Committee appointed.’ I asked the Brethren of the Twelve to convey this information to the other General Authorities. On motion, this became the consensus of the Council. [emphasis added]
_____


--Letters from McKay to Mormon Church Members Regarding McConkie’s Mormon Doctrine and Other Books Published by Individual General Authorities

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
47 E. South Temple Street
Salt Lake City, Utah
David O. McKay, President

"February 3, 1959

"Dr. A. Kent Christensen
Department of Anatomy
Cornell University Medical College
1300 York Avenue
New York 21, New York

"Dear Brother Christensen:

"I have your letter of January 23, 1959 in which you ask for a statement of the Church’s position on the subject of evolution.

"The Church has issued not official statement on the subject of the theory of evolution.

"Neither ‘Man, His Origin and Destiny’ by Elder Joseph Fielding Smith, nor ‘Mormon Doctrine’ by Elder Bruce R. McConkie, is an official publication of the Church. . . . [emphasis added]

"Sincerely yours,

[signed]

"David O. McKay
(President)"
_____


"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
47 East South Temple Street
Salt Lake City, Utah
David O. McKay
September 24, 1964

"Dr. Lorenzo Lisonbee, Science Consultant
Phoenix Union High School System
District Adminstration Annex
2042 West Thomas Road
Phoenix, Arizona (85015)

"Dear Dr. Lisonbee :

"President McKay, who is recuperating at home under doctors’ orders from his recent illness, has asked me to acknowledge for him your letter of September 8, 1964.

"I have been directed to say that individual General Authorities of the Church publish books on their own responsibility, the publishing of which is not regarded as Church approval of the books. The Church approves only books which have been authorized for publication by the General Authorities of the Church, such as the Standard Works of the Church and authorized textbooks adopted by official action of the Church for the Priesthood and the organizations fo the Church.

"Sincerely yours,

[signed]

"Clare Middlemiss
Secretary to:
President David O. McKay"
_____


Conclusion: Bruce R. McConkie, A Special Witness for Deceitfulness

McConkie never told me about any of this, the liar.

Then again, maybe he just forgot.

Let me, if I may, put a big, fat nail in NcConkie's coffin by referring to the observations of RfM poster "Fox," who responded as follows to my contention that McConkie's strong suit wasn't honesty:

"Steve . . .

"I don't think he believed he lied.

"You said"

"'In essence, McConkie’s explanation for his original reference (as it appeared in the 1958 first edition of Mormon Doctrine) to the Roman Catholic Church as the "Church of the Devil" being expunged from in its subsequent 1966 re-publication was, he said, a matter of good manners and sensitivity--and had nothing to do with the theological truth of his claim.

"'At that point in my travels through Mormonism's maze of muck, I didn't know any better but to accept what McConkie told me as being factual.

"'The trouble was, McConkie’s smiling assertion turned out to be a bald-face lie.'

"I think it is possible that when the other GAs met with him they discussed his interpretation of not including things such as the devil comment and that he should not have included it for the very reasons he told you.

"The GAs might have all agreed that his doctrine was sound but that those comments, along with the others mentioned, were too controversial to include in the book.

"What do you think?"

("Re: The Day Bruce R. McConkie'Personally Lied To Me: The Death Spiral for His 'Mormon Doctrine" Had Actually Begun Decades Earlier ," by poster "Fox," on "Recovery from Mormonism" discussion board, 19 May 2011)


From my perspective, McConkie was an amazingly arrogant GA, unmatched in his time by his egotistical view that he was absolutely correct in his interpretation and espousal of Mormon doctrine.

McConkie was not about to admit to me he was brought to heel by McKay, that his book was deemed by his fellow General Authorities as unauthorized in its initial release and that it did not, in fact, constitute accurate LDS Church doctrine which was worthy of initial publication or subsequent re-publication.

McConkie told me that the standard for judging whether the Mormon president was speaking God's word was the Standard Works themselves. His view was that the canonized scriptures were to be used to determine the ultimate doctrinal validity (or lack thereof) of Mormon prophet-leader teachings. To be sure, McConkie was clearly not beyond telling me that the teachings of some LDS presidents were, in his self-informed opinion, doctrinally incorrect.

Indeed, in that same conversation in July 1980 at his home, McConkie told me that McKay's public comments (delivered to BYU students when president of the Church and archived in BYU's Harold B. Lee Library's "Speeches of the Year" collection) regarding the ancient age of the Earth and the beauty of the theory of organic evolution were not inspired by the Holy Ghost.

McConkie also told me that Brigham Young's Adam-God teachings constituted false doctrine.

In short, McConkie was content with leaving me with the decidedly false impression that what was included in his book "Mormon Doctrine" was doctrinally sound and that what was taken out of his book in the 2nd edition was only removed because it was too controversially true for people to handle.

McConkie certainly wasn't going to blurt out to me that the McKay-directed review of "Mormon Doctrine" found the book to be replete with doctrinal errors and misstatements, to contain offensive language, to be discourteous in its approach and to not only be unauthorized for publication in the first place but not to be fit for re-publication.

I would describe the approach on McConkie's part in his face-to-face with me per these areas to have been an exercise in deliberate deceit; i.e., lying.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2013 10:42PM by steve benson.

Wow, thank you Steve for taking the time to respond to my thread. I always thought McConkie was the one apostle that could be respected-- but after reading your post and others, I now realize that he is no better than any of the other church leaders and just as big of a liar!

Like so many of my other past TBM beliefs-- here goes another one down the toilet.

This forum has been great in opening my eyes to the deceit of TSCC. Thank you.

. . . who, even by Bruce R's flexible "truth" standards, were overstretching the facts to the point where he decided he had to take action:

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,988002,988002#msg-988002



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2013 11:48PM by steve benson.

One of the hard things about looking behind the curtain, is to discover that so many of your heroes were not only not perfect, but often villains.

I used to love Porter Rockwell. To me, he was a Mormon version of Wyatt Earp, engaging in dozens of gunfights and yet never being scraped by a bullet. Only later did I realize that many of his exploits were not only exaggerated, but the reason he was never shot, was not because of his faith, but because he made a point to only get in gunfights with people who were looking the other way, preferably when they were unarmed, and did not pose a threat to anyone. In other words, he was a murderous thug.

It is the almost always the same whenever you study any hero of Mormonism. Beneath all the BS there is just S.

.....Steve, despite the agreement/decision that "Mormon Doctrine" not be republished, it was edited and then republished in 1966. Further, it was actively in print for at least 10 years after that, and sold many, many copies. What gives?

. . . as president of the Quorum of the Twelve, looked the other way, combined with the declining health of then-Church president David O. MacKay's.

This convenient confluence of events provided McConkie the chance to sneak his book back into publication, despite his personal promise to the Quorum of the Twelve not to do so.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2013 11:39PM by steve benson.

An aging and still gentle McKay agreed to let McConkie republish it. McKay and other senior people said definitively that it was not doctrine, and the book itself contains that caveat.

But the truth is that people want simplicity. And Mormon Doctrine was published and republished, enjoyed the prestige that comes from having the imprimatur of a a respected apostle, and was available everywhere. When missionaries or bishops or seminary teachers needed answers, they went to MD and got them. MD slowly but powerfully influenced church thinking and even disciplinary standards.

Functionally, if not officially, MD became doctrine. It was one of the things that made Mormonism scherotic.

. . . and driven by the Divine Dollar. McConkie wanted his money-maker back in print--which ultimately ended up going through 40 printings and selling hundreds of thousands of copies.

"McKay feared that if the [recommended] corrections [to the first edition of McConkie's 'Mormon Doctrine'] were made, it would seriously affect McConkie's credibility, so he preferred not to see the book republished at all.

"Nonetheless, McConkie audaciously approached McKay six years later and pushed for publication of the book in a revised form according to [Gregory Prince and Robert Wright, authors of .'David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism'] McKay responded that 'if republished,' the book should be clearly marked as McConkie's work and not an official Church publication.

"McConkie took that as a go-ahead," Prince and Wright wrote.

"'The book became one of the all-time best-sellers in Mormondom,' they wrote, 'achieving the near-canonical status that McKay had fought unsuccessfully to avoid, and setting a tone of doctrinal fundamentalism, antithetical to McKay's personal philosophy, that remains a legacy of the church to this day.'"

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_15137409
_____


And, yes, McConkie reneged on his pledge to McKay not to republish his "Mormon Doctrine." As noted in my earlier post in this thread, taken from McKay's daily office journal:

"Thursday, January 28, 1960

"8:30 to 9 a.m. Bruce R. McConkie’s Book

"Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency. I reported to my counselors that I had talked with President Joseph Fielding Smith about the decision that the book ‘Mormon Doctrine’ should not be republished and about handling the matter to avoid undermining Brother McConkie’s influence. President Smith agreed that the book should not be republished, and said he would talk with Brother McConkie. It was decided that the First Presidency should inform Brother McConkie before he learns of our decision from some other source, so Brother McConkie was asked to come into our meeting this morning.

"When he arrived I informed him of the desire of the First Presidency with reference to h is book not being republished, to which he agreed. The recommendation was also made that he answer inquiries on the subject with care. Brother McConkie said, ‘I am amenable to whatever you Brethren want. I will do exactly what you want. I will be as discreet and as wise as I can.’ In answering letters he said that he would express no views contrary to views which the First Presidency has expressed. He said that he would conform in every respect. . . .

"10 a.m. to 2:45 p.m.

"Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve in the Salt Lake Temple.

"At Council meeting I reported to the Brethren our decision regarding Elder Bruce R. McConkie’s book ‘Mormon Doctrine,’ stating that it had caused considerable comment throughout the Church, and that it has been a source of concern to the Brethren ever since it was published. I said that this book had not been presented to anyone for consideration or approval until after its publication. I further said that the First Presidency have [sic] give it very careful consideration, as undoubtedly have some of the Brethren of the Twelve also, and that the First Presidency now recommend that the book be not republished; that it be not republished even in a corrected form, even though Brother McConkie mentions in the book that he takes all responsibility for it; and that it not be recognized as an authoritative book.

"I said further that the question has arisen as to whether a public correction should be made and a addendum given emphasizing the [bottom line of photocopied page of journal cut off] . . . it is felt that that would not be wise because Brother McConkie is one of the General Authorities, and it might lessen his influence. The First Presidency recommend that the situation be left as it is, and whenever a question about it arises, we can answer that it is unauthoritative; that it was issued by Brother McConkie on his own responsibility, and he must answer for it.

"I reported that the First Presidency had talked to Brother McConkie this morning, and he said he will do whatever the Brethren want him to do. He will not attempt to republish the book nor to say anything by letter, and if he answers letters or inquiries that he will answer them in accordance with the suggestions made by the Brethren, and not advocate those things concerning which question had been raised as contained in the book.

"The Brethren unanimously approved of this.

"I then said that the First Presidency further recommend that when any member of the General Authorities desires to write a book, that the Brethren of the Twelve or the First Presidency be consulted regarding it. While the author need not get the approval of these Brethren, they should know before it is published that a member of the General Authorities wants to publish a book. I said it may seem all right for the writer of the book to say, ‘I only am responsible for it,’ but I said ‘you cannot separate your position from your individuality, and we should like the authors to present their books to the Twelve or a Committee appointed.’ I asked the Brethren of the Twelve to convey this information to the other General Authorities. On motion, this became the consensus of the Council."



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 08/12/2013 11:59PM by steve benson.

A cousin of mine married into the McConkie family. My TBM mother, who incidentally never liked Bruce R, once asked her what family reunions were like. My cousin replied, "They stand around trying to out-pontificate each other."

(I had Joseph McConkie for a religion teacher at BYU. He was a massive blowhard and intellectual simpleton, though he could be funny on occassion.)

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,988101,988101#msg-988101



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 08/13/2013 12:15AM by steve benson.

He was a sexist, racist, homophobic pseudo-intellectual liar.

He was the average GA on steroids; he didn't know fuck all about what he was talking about, yet that never stopped him from opining on anything.

All his "spiritual" knowledge was a front. He didn't know shit about the bible, Judaism, or anything else he decided to comment on without bothering to do the least bit of research about.

It's not a surprise that his "Mormon Doctrine" is constantly redacted and "apologized" for.

The man didn't know shit.

I disliked McConkie for his disregard of the church president, David O. McKay, who disapproved of McConkie's book and advised against it being published. But McConkie was more arrogant than others believed, and pushed it through behind McKay's back.

But most of all it's the racism. All the other stuff, too, of course, but his book is unapologetically racist.

I remember when I got my 1966 version of MD, I was thrilled; it contained the "mysteries of the gospel." I read and gobbled up everything, thinking that I was learning the great truths of mankind. Then the shelf collapsed.

In retrospect, it is just a proxy for the church: lot's of intellectual hooey with no real substance that is ultimately, just BS.

How ironic, just a pile of BS from a BM.

I was surprised by how unpopular McConkie was at BYU when I was there. I had been raised with Mormon Doctrine next to the scriptures, and I had never heard any criticism of McConkie until then. I read his Messiah series faithfully, and I also owned his Article of Faith book in hardcover. I thought his books were internally consistent and had a lot of answers that I couldn't get from other books.

I didn't realize what a racist ass he was until after I left the Church and re-read passages from Mormon Doctrine like "Races of Men." Or the opening chapter of his Articles of Faith book where he discussed how righteousness runs in royal families.

Mormon Doctrine is no longer in print by Deseret Book, and his Messiah series is in ebook only now. The caravan moves on...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/13/2013 11:28AM by Makurosu.

In the seventies when I was at the peak of activity, it was understood that several books were semi-canonical and a "must have" for the mantle of the serious LDS family. These were:

Doctrines of Salvation, Vols 1-3, Joseph Fielding Smith
Mormon Doctrine, Bruce McConkie
A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, Spencer W. Kimball

They were constantly quoted from in talks from the pulpit and considered by many to be the "meat" spoken of by missionaries, i.e., the mysterious truths that converts would learn "later."

In addition to being mean-spirited, McConkie's self-aggrandizing took on a particularly vicious tone when he destroyed the career of George Pace, who was my religion teacher at BYU.

The crime that Pace had committed was actually the crime of selling more books than McConkie. Pace was more popular and McConkie used his apostleship to rebuke him in public so that his book, "Knowing Christ" would not take sales from McConkie's "Jesus the Christ."

McConkie had been treated with kid gloves by the Q12 in order to save his career and spare him and the church humiliation. He was also treated with compassion by David O. McKay, who ignored McKonkie's disgraceful failure to comply with the agreement he made not to republish "Mormon Doctrine."

McConkie was grandiose and did not have the largeness of spirit to repay that kindness. Although his career had been spared when own book had been found by his peers and superiors to be full of errors, he had the audacity to claim the right to publicly correct another and devastate his career.

To get the best sense of the man, read his own words here in the talk he gave at BYU which ruined George Pace:

http://transfiguredword.blogspot.com/2011/02/george-w-pace-and-bruce-r-mcconkie.html


Anagrammy



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/13/2013 11:59AM by anagrammy.

What McConkie did was cruel. That said, George Pace was a pompous ass and, in this case, McConkie was more theologically correct than Pace.

Hmmm.

Let's talk about character in Mormon terms.

When George Pace was publicly told by a superior to STFU, he did that.

When Bruce McConkie was told by his superiors not to republish Mormon Doctrine, he did not obey.

We all know how important it is in Mormonism to obey.

George Pace did so at the cost of his career.

McKonkie went for the cash.

I knew George Pace and admired him. I know he was a true believer AND a pompous ass, just like I was. Whether you truly believe, or pretend to believe, while Mormon you become a pompous ass because you are supporting institutional mysogynism, polygamy, homophobia, anti-Semitism and racism.

I'll tell you who I admire. I admire the average Mormon who has the courage to get more information. My heroes are those who summon the courage and take the risk to tell their spouse, their best friend, their concerns about the church. They do this knowing their lives might never be the same--just like a soldier going into battle.

The True Family Hero is the person who rejects the core ethic of Mormonism "The end justifies the means." This person is a hero because he or she leads their children out of a life of obedience to male domination and financial handicap which lowers their standard of living for a God that needs their support money for luxury malls and empty temples.

Now if you want to put a photo of somebody up on the wall in place of the prophet, how about Jerald and Sandra Tanner, the original apostates?

They have done more for the benefit of mankind than any apostle.


Anagrammy

That's absolutely true about the books you mentioned being semi-canonical. The ones by Joseph Fielding Smith are pretty wild if you read them now.

I think you mean McConkie's "Messiah" series though. James E. Talmage wrote "Jesus the Christ."

He was like many religious "authorities." All you have to do is act like you know what you're talking about. Theology is something that is tenuous and flexible. The reason is simple; It's all imaginary, totally fabricated! Someone with the initiative can pick up the ball and run with it, and he can pick his own direction. That's what McConkie did.

Very interesting thread.

It explains something I never understood from my short time as a convert. In EQ meetings, there was one man immaculately dressed with the most incredible pompous arrogant attitude I've ever witnessed - right up there with military general officers (who I have interacted with a few times).

He was originally from Utah and it's apparent to me now he was emulating these blowhard GA types.

My experience over the years is these type of people are not deserving of respect. The "good" ones treat everyone with respect regardless of the size of their bank account or rank within whatever organization they are a member.