This is the second entry in a series of blog posts about some of the interesting and important policies of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints contained in the church’s official Handbook #2. Familiarity and compliance with LDS Church guidelines is encouraged. For background, see the introductory post.
Notes and Recordings of Talks and Addresses by General Authorities
“Church members should not record the talks or addresses that General Authorities and Area Seventies give at stake conferences, missionary meetings, or other meetings. However, members may record broadcasts of general conference on home equipment for personal, noncommercial use.” (emphasis added)
“From time to time, statements are circulated that are inaccurately attributed to leaders of the Church. Many such statements distort current Church teachings and are based on rumors and innuendos. They are never transmitted officially, but by word of mouth, e-mail, or other informal means. Church members should not teach or pass on such statements without verifying that they are from approved Church sources, such as official statements, communications, and publications.”
“Any notes made when General Authorities, Area Seventies, or other general Church officers speak at stake conferences or other meetings should not be distributed without the consent of the speaker. Personal notes are for individual use only.” (emphasis added)
This is a great series, Jon. I like that the only commentary you give is highlighting. It seems quite effective at making points, to me. I see lots of reasons for this particular policy–respect, careful source checking, and how error prone verbal communication is, especially when stripped of verbal and physical clues, to name a few. Parts of it make me sad, though, that we live in such a legalistic and uncharitable world that the Church has to protect itself by telling members not to keep the best records possible (by actually recording what is said). So many historical questions could more easily been answered had these beautiful record keeping technologies been around and employed throughout our Church’s history. I think policies like this walk a necessary, but ugly, line between an ideal openness and a need for institutional unity in a judgmental world. I hope for a time when we can walk this line in ways that allow for greater diversity of thought and understanding. I think the steps empowering bishops and encouraging fuller use of councils in the last decades has been a good trend in this way. I hope for a day when that power will be diffused even more to quorum presidents, Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary presidents, and eventually individual members. I really believe that is the ultimate goal of our theology.